1

Minutes of the 2nd Meeting of the Planning, Works and Housing Committee

Eastern District Council

Date: 6 February 2018 (Tuesday) Time: 2:30 pm Venue: Eastern District Council Conference Room

Present Time of Arrival (pm)

Time of Departure (pm)

Mr TING Kong-ho, Eddie 2:30 end of meeting Mr WONG Chi-chung, Dominic 2:30 end of meeting Mr WONG Chun-sing, Patrick 5:15 end of meeting Mr WONG Kwok-hing, BBS, MH 2:30 4:00 Mr KU Kwai-yiu 2:35 5:15 Mr HO Ngai-kam, Stanley 2:30 end of meeting Mr LEE Chun-keung 2:35 4:00 Mr LAM Sum-lim 2:32 end of meeting Mr LAM Kei-tung, George 2:30 end of meeting Mr SHIU Ka-fai 2:30 end of meeting Mr HUNG Lin-cham 2:30 4:00 Mr CHUI Chi-kin 3:30 5:30 Mr CHEUNG Kwok-cheong, Howard 2:44 end of meeting Mr LEUNG Siu-sun, Patrick 2:35 5:30 Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, David (Chairman) 2:30 end of meeting Mr HUI Lam-hing 2:30 4:15 Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Aron, JP 2:33 3:23 Mr MAK Tak-ching 2:30 5:05 Mr YEUNG Sze-chun (Vice-chairman) 2:30 end of meeting Dr CHIU Ka-yin, Andrew 2:30 end of meeting Mr CHIU Chi-keung, BBS 2:30 end of meeting Mr LAU Hing-yeung 4:58 end of meeting Ms CHOY So-yuk, BBS, JP 3:05 3:50 Mr CHENG Chi-sing 2:30 end of meeting Mr CHENG Tat-hung 2:30 end of meeting Mr LAI Chi-keong, Joseph 2:33 end of meeting Mr NGAN Chun-lim, MH 2:30 end of meeting Mr LO Wing-kwan, Frankie, MH 2:30 end of meeting Mr KUNG Pak-cheung, MH 2:30 end of meeting

Absent with Apologies

2

Ms LEUNG Wing-man, Bonnie Mr WONG Kin-pan, BBS, MH, JP Mr WONG Kin-hing In Regular Attendance (Government Representatives) Mr CHUI Cheuk-yin, Matthew

Assistant District Officer (Eastern) (2), Eastern District Office

Ms WONG Sze-man, Queenie

Senior Liaison Officer(2), Eastern District Office

Mr HO Kwok-fai, Godfrey

Senior Engineer / 6 (South), Civil Engineering and Development Department

Mr NG Tak-wah Senior Town Planner/Hong Kong (2), Planning Department

Ms HO Mun-yee, Money

Senior Estate Surveyor/Hong Kong East(3), District Lands Office (Hong Kong East)

Mr WONG Wai-leung Chief Health Inspector (Eastern) 1, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department

Miss CHAN Wai-lin, Rose

Senior Housing Manager/Hong Kong Island and Islands 1, Housing Department

Ms CHEUNG Wai-yu Maintenance Surveyor/ Hong Kong Island and Islands, Housing Department

Mr YUNG Shu-yan Principle Survey Officer / B5-3, Buildings Department

Ms LEE Shuk-han, Phoebe (Secretary)

Executive Officer I (District Council)2, Eastern District Office

In Attendance by Invitation (Representatives from the Government and Organisations) Mr LO Sai-cheong, Michael

Senior Engineer / Eastern, Drainage Services Department

Mr MOK Wai-kee, Kenneth

Senior Engineer / Drainage Projects 3, Drainage Services Department

Mr CHENG Man-wai Engineer / Drainage Projects 6, Drainage Services Department

Mr WONG Chi-yung Senior Engineer / District,

3

Civil Engineering and Development Department Mr CHAN Lit-wai Senior Engineer/ New Territories 3,

Highways Department Mr CHAN Wai-hung Engineer/ New Territories 3-3,

Highways Department Mr WAN Wai-keung Director,

WSP (Asia) Limited Mr LI Yick-chun Engineer / Housing and Planning 3,

Transport Department Mr LO Wai-pan, Eddie

Senior Executive Officer (Planning)5, Leisure and Cultural Services Department

Mr POON Chi-chung Property Service Manager/ Service (Hong Kong Island and Islands)1, Housing Department

Mr LAU Wai-leung Acting Senior Engineer/Hong Kong 2, Water Supplies Department

Mr WONG Oi-sing Engineer / Hong Kong (Customer Services) Inspection, Water Supplies Department

Opening Remarks The Chairman welcomed all Members and representatives of the Government to the meeting. I. Confirmation of the Draft Minutes of the 11th Meeting (2016-2017) and

the 1st Meeting of PWHC 2. The Planning, Works and Housing Committee (PWHC) confirmed the above two draft minutes without amendment. II. Terms of Reference of PWHC (PWHC Paper No. 1/18) 3. The Secretary briefed the meeting on Paper No. 1/18. 4. Members noted the terms of reference of the PWHC in the above paper.

Action

4

III. Nomination of Co-opted Members of PWHC (PWHC Paper No. 2/18) 5. The Secretary briefed the meeting on Paper No. 2/18. Members noted the information of community services about the two nominees, namely, Mr KONG Chack-ho, Alex and Ms LAU Sing-she, Dana. 6. The PWHC approved the proposal of recommending the above two nominees to the Eastern District Council (EDC) as co-opted members of the PWHC. The terms of office of the co-opted members would commence upon the confirmation of their appointment by the EDC and would be valid until 31 December 2019. (Post-meeting note: The recommended appointment was confirmed by the EDC

by circulation on 15 March 2018.) IV. Endorsement of the List of Regular Government Representatives in

Attendance of PWHC Meetings (PWHC Paper No. 3/18) 7. The Secretary briefed the meeting on Paper No. 3/18.

8. The PWHC endorsed the list of regular government representatives as proposed in the above paper. V. Formation of Working Group under PWHC (PWHC Paper No. 4/18) 9. The Secretary briefed the meeting on Paper No. 4/18. 10. The PWHC approved the establishment of the Working Group on Harbourfront Development and Housing Management with the term of office until 31 December 2019 and also confirmed its terms of reference as stated in the appendix of the paper. VI. Drainage Improvement Works at Fei Tsui Road, Chai Wan (PWHC Paper No. 5/18)

Action

5

11. The Chairman welcomed Mr Michael LO, Senior Engineer / Eastern, Mr Kenneth MOK, Senior Engineer / Drainage Projects 3, and Mr CHENG Man-wai, Engineer / Drainage Projects 6 of the Drainage Services Department (DSD) to the meeting. Mr Michael LO, Mr Kenneth MOK and Mr CHENG Man-wai of the DSD briefed the meeting on Paper No. 5/18. 12. The views and enquiries of 8 Members about the matter are summarised as follows:

(a) Mr WONG Kwok-hing appreciated the DSD’s response to Members’ concern by proposing the above-mentioned drainage improvement works. He pointed out that the flooding problem at the Chai Wan Road roundabout was mainly caused by the relatively low drainage capacity at low-lying areas. Therefore, he was worried that the drainage improvement works might not be able to resolve the problem completely. He invited the DSD to give an elaboration on the flood conveyance capacity of the proposed U-channels and the improvement measures at the downstream. Moreover, he suggested the DSD consider constructing an underground storm water storage tank to reduce the risk of flooding. Furthermore, he enquired whether the channel covers to be installed could withstand the pressure from heavy vehicles passing by every day.

(b) Mr KU Kwai-yiu indicated that rubbish had often accumulated at the

gullies at Fei Tsui Road, making Chai Wan Road roundabout vulnerable to flooding. Besides, he pointed out that the drains to be built were relatively close to the ground level. He expressed worry that the flood water might overflow to the road surface. In order to root out the flooding problem at the roundabout completely, he suggested the DSD construct more inlets for attenuating the flood water. He urged the DSD’s staff to give way to emergency vehicles upon emergency when carrying out the improvement works so as to avoid hindrance to rescue work.

(c) Mr LEE Chun-keung expressed appreciation for the DSD’s proposal of

the above drainage improvement works in response to opinions of the public. He showed concern over the flood conveyance capacity of the channels and drains to be constructed and requested the DSD to provide statistics about the maximum rainfall relieving capacity of the drainage system. Besides, he was worried that the improvement

Action

6

works would generate additional waste and thus worsen the problem of drain blockage. Therefore, he hoped that the DSD would conduct inspection and maintenance on a regular basis and provide a timetable in this regard. He also wanted to learn about the methods the DSD would adopt to improve the flooding problem at the downstream.

(d) Mr Aron KWOK said that waste and rubbish had often accumulated at

the gullies at Fung Wah Estate, easily subjecting channels to blockage. He hoped that the DSD could enhance the gully emptying efforts before the rainy season arrived. He understood that prolonged heavy rainstorms were rare. Nevertheless, he opined that the DSD should be able to produce accurate estimation of the flood conveyance capacity of drains and channels, and should also carefully evaluate the impact of blockage on the drainage system, hence putting forward an effective long-term proposal to improve the situation, e.g. constructing additional gullies, in order to prevent the needs for further improvement proposals in future.

(e) Mr Joseph LAI indicated that the above-mentioned improvement

works would only focus on part of the drainage system. He suggested the DSD provide more comprehensive information in order to allow the public to understand how the DSD was improving the flooding problem at the Chai Wan Road roundabout with well-planned actions. For instance, he suggested the DSD disclose information on the drainage system from King Tsui Court to the roundabout and the vicinity, the connection measures for new and old channels, and their flood conveyance capacity and so on. Besides, he hoped that the DSD could strengthen its communication with the Water Supplies Department (WSD) and consider expanding the gullies near King Tsui Court. In addition, he enquired about the emergency measures against sudden rainstorms before the commencement of the works, as well as the traffic arrangements at Ching Ming Festival and Chung Yeung Festival during the works period.

(f) Mr Frankie LO said that there would be repair and maintenance works

at Moon Wah Building on Sui Man Road and the hill slope in the vicinity. The slope concerned had insufficient flood conveyance capacity and its structure might have already been weakened. The residents estimated that the repair costs would be high and barely affordable for them. In order to enhance the flood catchment and

Action

7

conveyance capacity, he quoted the repair works of a retaining wall of Comfort Terrace in Fortress Hill as an example and suggested the DSD consider constructing (an) additional U-channel(s) at Sui Man Road. He also suggested the DSD consider constructing additional gullies to direct accumulated water to underground areas so as to prevent the negative impact on the slope structure imposed by flooding incidents in future.

(g) Mr KUNG Pak-cheung agreed that additional drainage pipes should be

constructed at Fei Tsui Road to diverge and drain away flood water efficiently. He was worried that excessively high water pressure of underground pipes could force the channel covers open. He also expressed concern over the water drainage arrangement at the downstream. He hoped that the DSD would provide information with greater details and also make early preparation for the rainy season in time. Besides, he enquired about the locations of the connection points of the existing box culvert and he hoped that the DSD could illustrate the drainage system near the roundabout with the images captured by closed-circuit television cameras.

(h) Mr Patrick LEUNG welcomed the improvement works put forward by

the DSD. He enquired whether the proposed new channels and drains could handle the flood water from heavy rainstorms, the method through which the DSD determined the number of U-channels required to be built, and whether any other facilities would be constructed near the roundabout for draining away flood water.

13. Mr Michael LO, Mr Kenneth MOK and Mr CHENG Man-wai of the DSD responded to the views and enquiries of Members as follows:

(a) The prolonged heavy rainstorm on 19 October 2016 caused flooding in a number of areas in the Eastern District. Among them, the case of flooding at Chai Wan Road roundabout was the most severe one. The DSD reviewed the flood water drainage system of the upstream at Chai Wan Road roundabout and proposed the construction of additional underground channels along Fei Tsui Road in order to enhance the flood conveyance capacity of that location and its vicinity.

(b) The DSD was currently conducting the Drainage Master Plan Study on

Northern Hong Kong Island and expected to announce its results in

Action

8

mid-2018. Upon such announcement, the DSD would provide detailed information on the improvement measures targeting Chai Wan Road roundabout and the downstream. Project proposals, such as the construction of storm water storage tanks, would also be put forward. Members would be welcome to express their views.

(c) Before the commencement of the above-mentioned improvement works,

the DSD would implement a series of measures to alleviate the flooding problem, including studying about the ways to improve the storm water collection system and reviewing gully facilities together with the Highways Department (HyD), and collaborating with the WSD and Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) on the enhancement of gully emptying and catchment channel clearance.

(d) Upon the issuance of rainstorm warning signals, the DSD would deploy

manpower to inspect the inlets in the area and empty the waste therein. Besides, under poor weather conditions, the DSD would deploy response teams to stand by at Chai Wan Road roundabout to facilitate timely inspection and drain clearance in the hope of reducing the risks of flooding.

(e) As Fei Tsui Road was built along a hill and the rock strata therein were

relatively shallow, the DSD specifically adopted the design of upper and lower pipe liners, constructing additional drain pipes above the existing pipeline. Such a design would not only retain the flood conveyance capability of the drainage pipes but also help to prevent the problem of drain blockage by waste and shorten the required duration of the works by reducing the works’ complexity.

(f) Moreover, the DSD proposed the construction of two U-channels

spanning over Fei Tsui Road near Wan Tsui Road so as to intercept the surface-runoff across Fei Tsui Road for preventing the surface-runoff from flowing downstream along the road to Chai Wan Road roundabout. The U-channels to be constructed would work with the existing gullies to trigger the double shields effect and help to direct storm water into underground channels for reducing the risks of road surface flooding. The materials selected for constructing the U-channels spanning over the road would be stronger than those for constructing general U-channels and the channel covers would be fixed on the road surface to reduce the potential risks to road safety brought by channel cover

Action

9

displacement. The DSD estimated that the channels to be constructed could handle rainfall as heavy as that in October 2016, i.e. storm water generated by rain as heavy as 109 millimetres in an hour.

(g) The DSD would discuss with various stakeholders on the traffic

measures to be taken during the works implementation. Special traffic arrangements would also be in place during the Ching Ming Festival and Chung Yeung Festival, during school examination periods and upon emergency so as to minimise the negative impacts brought to the public by the works. The DSD would also deploy manpower to supervise the works on site. Upon special incidents, the works would be suspended and the works-related materials would be moved away in time. The DSD’s staff would also help with facilitating the traffic to avoid hindrance to the traffic by the works.

(h) Before the commencement of the improvement works, the DSD would

have installed a monitoring system and flood protection walls in the vicinity of Chai Wan Road roundabout in the hope of reducing the surface run-off across Fei Tsui Road. The DSD was currently studying the proposal of installing stop-logs at certain channel covers to prevent water pressure from forcing them open.

(i) The existing box culvert was connected to at least three major drain

channels. However, as the drainage network at Fei Tsui Road was of high complexity, the DSD had not indicated the network on the drawing.

(j) The DSD could explain the drainage drawing in greater detail to

individual Members after the meeting.

(k) According to the projection of hydraulic models, the existing drainage system at the downstream was capable of handling storm water from all old and new channels. No bottleneck effect would be triggered.

(l) With unexpected climatic changes, weather conditions were difficult to

predict, the DSD would make best endeavours to enhance the flood protection level, maintain clear drainage channels and consistently monitor the effectiveness of the improvement works to prevent the occurrence of flooding.

Action

10

(m) The DSD would step up the gully emptying efforts at King Tsui Court and had taken the situation concerned into consideration in the works design to facilitate appropriate improvement.

All attendees 14. After discussion, the PWHC was supportive of the above-mentioned

improvement works and agreed to include the agenda item into the matters arising by combining it with follow-up item (9). VII. Request to Construct Breakwater-like Facilities at the Sea off the Areas

of Heng Fa Chuen (PWHC Paper No. 6/18) 15. The Chairman welcomed Mr WONG Chi-yung, Senior Engineer / District of the Civil Engineering and Development Department (CEDD) and Ms Money HO, Senior Estate Surveyor/Hong Kong East(3) of the District Lands Office / Hong Kong East (DLO) to the meeting. Mr Stanley HO briefed the meeting on Paper No. 8/18. Mr WONG Chi-yung of the CEDD responded. 16. The views and enquiries of 12 Members about the matter are summarised as follows:

(a) Mr WONG Kwok-hing expressed disappointment at the response from the departments. As Heng Fa Chuen had often been subject to the impacts of huge waves under poor weather conditions, the department(s) should bear the responsibility to construct breakwater-like facilities to consolidate the development of the housing facilities and safeguard the lives and properties of the public rather than shirk the responsibility with various excuses.

(b) Mr Stanley HO opined that the written replies from the departments were far from precise. The departments should state clearly the boundaries of the existing seawalls and the party responsible for their repair and maintenance. If the support from the policy bureau(x) concerned was required for the projects, the policy bureau(x) should be consulted in advance. News reports about poor weather conditions from the site of Heng Fa Chuen had reflected the strength of the winds and the roughness of the sea at the seawall boundaries, which stirred up his worries that the safety of members of the public might be at risk in future. Therefore, he hoped that the department(s)

Action

11

could pay heed to the problem and implement onshore or offshore measures for reducing the negative impacts on the residents imposed by waves. Besides, he enquired whether the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) would consolidate the seawall off the Heng Fa Chuen Playground.

(c) Mr KU Kwai-yiu agreed on installing additional breakwater-like

facilities at Heng Fa Chuen’s seawalls as that location had been prone to the impact of strong winds and rough waves for years. Nevertheless, since the land ownership belonged to the private developer, the Government should not deploy public funds to safeguard the private development. On the contrary, the department(s) concerned should demand that the private land developer construct breakwater-like facilities within the boundaries of their property for safeguarding the interests of residents.

(d) Mr SHIU Ka-fai said that huge waves had brought serious impact to

seawalls and exposed the area to dangers. He suggested the department(s) clearly delineate the area boundaries and responsibilities so that Members could follow up accordingly. Besides, he reminded the department(s) that various factors, such as safety, the view of buildings and so on, should be taken into consideration when designing breakwater-like facilities so as to avoid causing negative impacts to residents.

(e) Mr Andrew CHIU expressed concern over the potential threats to safety

brought by huge waves. He pointed out that although the Government should bear the responsibility to safeguard the lives and properties of the public, public funds should be utilised in a wise and proper manner. Therefore, the department(s) should put forward appropriate improvement measures and clearly delineate the responsibilities at different land lots and detailed duty division. Then, District Councillor of the area concerned should discuss the viability of constructing breakwater-like facilities with the private landowner. Besides, he opined that the Development Bureau (DEVB) had the responsibility to follow up on Members’ request and coordinate the work among departments. Thus, he hoped that the DEVB could send representatives to attend the next PWHC meeting for providing Members with more detailed information.

Action

12

(f) Mr CHENG Tat-hung invited the DLO to provide the detailed boundaries of areas and the lease conditions concerned for clear delineation of the responsibilities between the Government and the private developer. Besides, he agreed that the Government should be cautious when deploying public funds. Therefore, he suggested the department(s) concerned conduct a preliminary study on wave measurement and the impacts of waves on residents before proactively discussing proposals of constructing breakwater-like facilities with the private landowner.

(g) Mr HUI Lam-hing expressed disappointment at the CEDD’s failure to

bear the responsibility of constructing breakwater-like facilities. He also suggested the DEVB send representatives to attend PWHC meetings for providing Members with detailed information.

(h) Mr Joseph LAI was pleased at the CEDD’s commitment to provide

advice to the responsible units. As Heng Fa Chuen was located within private lots, it had been subject to certain constraints in the waterfront development process. He hoped that the DLO would clearly delineate area boundaries. He also invited the Government to make reference to the practices adopted in slope maintenance and take the initiative to closely communicate with District Councillors and residents for discussing viable proposals of constructing breakwater-like facilities.

(i) Mr Frankie LO pointed out that Heng Fa Chuen had often been subject

to strong winds and huge waves under poor weather conditions. The carpark in the estate was also affected by flooding. In order to safeguard the public’s safety and to be prepared for the rainy season, he supported the construction of additional breakwater-like facilities on seawalls or in the sea. He also hoped that the DLO would clearly delineate area boundaries so as to facilitate follow-up in future.

(j) Mr CHUI Chi-kin enquired whether the Government had formulated

any policies on wave measurement and breakwater-like facilities.

(k) Mr KUNG Pak-cheung suggested the construction of breakwaters in the sea area for reducing the speed of waves and thus their impacts. He invited the DLO to clearly delineate sea and area boundaries and consult the Marine Department when necessary in order to avoid

Action

13

disturbance to waterways.

(l) Mr CHENG Chi-sing was supportive of the construction of breakwaters. He suggested the department(s) make reference to the design of Po Pin Chau and lay cross-shaped stones to reduce the impacts of waves.

17. Mr WONG Chi-yung of the CEDD and Ms Money HO of the DLO responded to the views and enquiries of Members as follows: CEDD

(a) The CEDD had compiled the Port Works Design Manual to establish standards for the design of seawalls and reclamation areas. In response to the impact brought to marine facilities by climate changes in Hong Kong, the CEDD had recently updated the Port Works Design Manual.

(b) The CEDD stated that the function of breakwaters was to reduce the

impacts from waves. The function was the same as that of boulder-like structures at typhoon shelters.

(c) The LCSD had consulted the CEDD on the consolidation and

improvement works of the seawall off the Heng Fa Chuen Playground. Meanwhile, the private developer of the Heng Fa Chuen land lots had not contacted the CEDD.

DLO

(d) The DLO would submit supplementary information after the meeting to give an account of the boundaries of the seawalls and the party responsible for their repair and maintenance.

(e) According to the land lease conditions of Heng Fa Chuen, the flat

owners of Heng Fa Chuen were obliged to bear the responsibility of repair and maintenance of the current seawall areas. Meanwhile, the LCSD should be responsible for the existing seawall off the Heng Fa Chuen Playground.

All attendees 18. After discussion, the PWHC agreed to include this issue into matters arising

Action

14

for further follow-up and invite the DEVB to send representatives to attend the next meeting. (Post-meeting note: The post-meeting supplementary information from the DLO

was passed to Members on 13 February 2018.) VIII. Urging the Department Concerned to Reconsider the Planning of

Braemar Hill Pedestrian Walkway System (PWHC Paper No. 7/18) 19. Since the matter was related to follow-up item (14), the Chairman suggested the combined discussion of the two agenda items and Members agreed. 20. The Chairman welcomed Mr CHAN Lit-wai, Senior Engineer/ New Territories 3 and Mr CHAN Wai-hung, Engineer/ New Territories 3-3 of the HyD, Mr WAN Wai-keung, Director of WSP (Asia) Limited, and Mr LI Yick-chun, Engineer / Housing and Planning 3 of the Transport Department (TD) to the meeting. Mr Frankie LO briefed the meeting on Paper No. 7/18. Mr CHAN Lit-wai of the HyD and Mr WAN Wai-keung of WSP (Asia) Limited responded. 21. The views and enquiries of 6 Members about the matter are summarised as follows:

(a) Mr SHIU Ka-fai said that the Braemar Hill pedestrian walkway system would facilitate the access between Braemar Hill and Fortress Hill. It had been 8 to 9 years since he put forward the suggestion of the project. He hoped that the HyD would expedite its progress in collecting opinions from various stakeholders and formulate a revised proposal on the project so as to commence the project as soon as possible. He and the District Councillor concerned had organised residents’ forums respectively. He had also conducted a questionnaire survey, which revealed that over 90% of residents were supportive of the project. He understood that some residents were still worrying about the potential impacts from the project, including the view of buildings, traffic routes and noise issues. He believed that the HyD would carefully consider residents’ opinions and strike a balance as appropriate. He expressed respect for the opinions of all stakeholders and suggested that the HyD proactively consider calling off the plan for constructing a viaduct spanning across Fortress Hill Road so as to

Action

15

allay residents’ concern.

(b) Mr CHUI Chi-kin criticised that the consultation exercise conducted by the HyD and the consultancy firm was confusing, and that the HyD should bear the responsibility for the exercise’s failure. He requested the HyD to disclose the study report prepared by the consultancy firm. Besides, he enquired about the consultancy fee for this project and whether the revised project proposal tied in with the original intent of the project. He relayed residents’ views that the HyD’s consultation work was unsatisfactory, involving confusing dissemination of messages to residents. It also failed to give an account of data such as the estimated cost of the project, its cost effectiveness and so on. Residents also queried why District Councillors showed support for the project proposal before consulting them.

(c) Mr Frankie LO was supportive of the construction of an additional lift

tower because it would facilitate easier access between Fortress Hill and King’s Road without the need for walking downstairs and benefit the development of the community as a whole. Nevertheless, he deemed the consultation work conducted by the HyD conservative and lacking in transparency. In addition, some residents were worried about the problem of subsidence. Therefore, he hoped that the HyD would enhance its communication with the residents and look into their concerns. If the HyD decided to adopt the at-grade crossing proposal in replacement of the proposal of constructing a footbridge over Fortress Hill Road, then the HyD could consider constructing an escalator at the current location of a staircase in between Fortress Hill Road and Tin Hau Temple Road. Besides, he hoped that the HyD could examine the feasibility of extending the height of the existing lift tower at Fortress Hill Road or extending the existing one-way upward escalator into a two-way one. He suggested the HyD disseminate the information in the PowerPoint presentation to residents.

(d) Mr CHENG Tat-hung expressed disappointment at the HyD’s failure

to take his advice of providing the information in the PowerPoint presentation in advance. As a result, Members could not learn about the information in detail. He then pointed out that the preliminary proposal of the project was put forward in 2016. However, the HyD and some District Councillors failed to thoroughly consult the residents and stakeholders. The current review of the proposal was

Action

16

only achieved upon the proactive expression of opinions by residents and stakeholders. He suggested the HyD implement the project in phases, starting with the less controversial part from Tin Hau Temple Road and above and handling the part from Fortress Hill Road to King’s Road later on in order to strike a balance of the interests of Braemar Hill’s residents and Fortress Hill’s residents. Besides, he did not agree with the suggestion of altering the current one-way upward escalator. He also hoped that the HyD would call off the proposal of constructing a viaduct across Fortress Hill Road and that of constructing a cover for the walkway outside Clementi Secondary School.

(e) Mr Andrew CHIU agreed that the HyD should respond to Members’

request by providing the information in the PowerPoint presentation in advance. Besides, the HyD should bear responsibility for the shortcomings of the consultation work. He hoped that the HyD would apologise to the affected residents. He also invited the HyD to handle this fault seriously.

(f) Mr KU Kwai-yiu indicated that some residents found it difficult to

directly contact the contact person as listed in the consultation paper. He hoped that the HyD would review the arrangement concerned.

22. Mr CHAN Lit-wai of the HyD and Mr WAN Wai-keung of the WSP (Asia) Limited responded to the views and enquiries of Members as follows:

(a) The HyD was willing to communicate with members of the public to understand their various concerns, including the subsidence problem and other worries.

(b) The HyD would design and construct an underground passage linking

MTR Fortress Hill Station and the lift tower concerned in accordance with the industry’s technical requirements and standards. The proposal would also be submitted to the Geotechnical Engineering Office for vetting and approval in order to ensure that it would not affect the safety of buildings and slopes in the vicinity. During the construction process, the HyD would continuously monitor the structural safety and maintain communication with residents nearby. As the area of construction would be above hard rock strata, it was estimated that the proposed project would not lead to the problem of

Action

17

subsidence.

(c) The HyD’s representative(s) attended a residents’ forum organised by (a) District Councillor(s) in 2016. In order to enhance the public’s awareness and understanding about the project of Braemar Hill pedestrian walkway system, from 21 November 2017 to 4 December 2017, the project proposal and its design were posted at both the Eastern Home Affairs Enquiry Centre and also along the boundaries of the proposed construction areas. The documents concerned had also been sent by postal mail to the owners’ corporations, owners’ committees or building management offices of the buildings in the vicinity of the affected area. Later on, the HyD’s representative(s) also attended residents’ forums by District Councillors to further explain the preliminary proposal and collect residents’ opinions.

(d) As it took time to prepare for the information in the PowerPoint

presentation, the HyD could not provide the information in advance. The HyD would provide the information after the meeting to Members for reference.

(e) Under the geographical constraints, it would not be possible to install

an additional escalator at the existing maintenance access and lift platform for wheelchairs. However, the HyD would review the feasibility of extending the current one-way upward escalator into a two-way one.

(f) As extending the current lift’s height would involve complicated

procedures, including foundation works and other works, it would be necessary to pause the operation of the existing lift. Inconvenience to residents would thus be caused. In addition, the lift with extended height would be likely to have negative impacts on the current view enjoyed by residents. Therefore, the HyD considered the suggestion undesirable.

(g) The HyD noted the opinions from the residents and Members about

replacing the construction of a footbridge across Fortress Hill Road with an at-grade crossing proposal. The HyD was proactively studying the suggestion concerned and would discuss it with the department(s) concerned. If the at-grade crossing proposal was deemed viable, the HyD would not be required to carry out land

Action

18

resumption for the private road at Fortress Garden near Fu Kar Court and also would not be required to alter the number of traffic lanes at the vehicular access concerned from four to two.

(h) In view of the opinions against the widening of the pavement at

Fortress Garden and the removal of the planter and trees near Fullview Court, the HyD would be willing to keep the existing planter and trees and study the feasibility of calling off the proposal for construction of a cover.

(i) As the HyD was required to submit the whole project for gazettal and

funding application, it would not be able to implement the project in phases.

(j) The HyD would conduct a review on the future consultation

arrangement. Consultation would be put forward to the residents and the EDC later on.

(k) The HyD could submit the executive summary of the study report to

the EDC later on for reference. As the consultation fee might involve information as listed in the contract, the HyD was not able to disclose the information concerned.

(l) The HyD clarified that both of the two engineers responsible for the

project had not taken any vacation leaves from 21 November 2017 to 4 December 2017. During that period, telephone enquiries had been received from a number of members of the public. The telephone system was performing its function properly. The responsible engineers had made their best endeavour to answer the telephone calls and provide replies for the public’s enquiries.

All attendees 23. After discussion, the PWHC agreed to include the agenda item into the

matters arising and to make a site visit. (Post-meeting note: (1) The information in the PowerPoint presentation from the

HyD was sent to Members on 29 March 2018. (2) The PWHC made a site visit on 15 March 2018.) IX. Progress Report of Matters Arising from Previous PWHC meetings

Action

19

(PWHC Paper No. 8/18) 24. The Chairman welcomed Mr Eddie LO, Senior Executive Officer (Planning)5 of the LCSD; Mr NG Tak-wah, Senior Town Planner/Hong Kong (2) of the Planning Department (PlanD); Ms Money HO, Senior Estate Surveyor/Hong Kong East(3) of the DLO; Miss Rose CHAN, Senior Housing Manager/Hong Kong Island and Islands 1, Ms CHEUNG Wai-yu, Maintenance Surveyor/ Hong Kong Island and Islands and Mr POON Chi-chung, Property Service Manager/ Service (Hong Kong Island and Islands) 1 of the Housing Department (HD); Mr Godfrey HO, Senior Engineer / 6 (South) of the CEDD; Mr YUNG Shu-yan, Principle Survey Officer / B5-3 of the Buildings Department (BD); Mr LAU Wai-leung, Acting Senior Engineer/Hong Kong 2 and Mr WONG Oi-sing, Engineer / Hong Kong (Customer Services) Inspection of the WSD to the meeting. (i) Strong Request for Building a District Library as soon as possible next to

Eastern Law Courts Building Scope of Development of the Joint User Complex at Lei King Wan

Preliminary Design Plan of the Joint User Complex at Lei King Wan Revised Design Proposal of the Joint User Complex at Lei King Wan Latest Design Proposal of the Joint User Complex at Lei King Road 25. The views and enquiries of 2 Members about the matter are summarised as follows:

(a) Mr NGAN Chun-lim pointed out that the above-mentioned project had been discussed since 2009 and the design proposal had been confirmed. He enquired of the LCSD about the commencement date of the project.

(b) The Vice-chairman enquired of the LCSD about the estimated date of

submission of the project to the Legislative Council (LegCo) for funding appropriation and the estimated date of project commencement after the completion of the refinement of the design proposal. He also enquired whether the LCSD had planned to further consult the EDC on the project details.

26. Mr Eddie LO of the LCSD responded to the views and enquiries of Members as follows:

Action

20

(a) Following the PWHC’s expression of support for the latest proposal submitted by the LCSD on 10 October 2017, the Architectural Services Department (ArchSD) had been continuing the design work of the joint user complex at Lei King Road.

(b) The LCSD had consulted the Task Force on Harbourfront

Developments on Hong Kong Island of the Harbourfront Commission on the design of the joint user complex in November 2017. In December, the LCSD had provided replies in response to the opinions of certain Members.

(c) The LCSD would proactively implement the project in accordance

with established procedures and would also continue to strive for resources in order to expedite the commencement of the project.

All attendees 27. After discussion, the PWHC agreed to continue to follow up on this matter.

(ii) Request to Construct a Swimming Pool at Quarry Bay Strongly Request the Government to Make Good Use of the Land Resources by Constructing a Standard Indoor Swimming Pool on the Side of Aldrich Garden Constructing an All-weather Indoor Swimming Pool with Green Concept at the Side of Tung Hei Road, Shau Kei Wan Greening and Leisure Facilities at Tung Hei Road Suggestion to Construct a Multi-storey Sports Centre on the Side of Aldrich Garden 28. The views and enquiries of 6 Members about the matter are summarised as follows:

(a) Mr Eddie TING expressed appreciation for the LCSD’s plan to construct the Aldrich Bay sports centre and leisure facilities for the open space and also its consideration of providing a swimming pool. Nevertheless, the selected location was not far away from the Island East Sports Centre and would thus lead to unsatisfactory resource allocation in the Eastern District as a whole. As the Quarry Bay site could fulfill the LCSD’s conditions in terms of population and demand for facilities, he suggested the LCSD treat the residents of Quarry Bay and North Point areas fairly by proactively considering the construction of a swimming pool at the Quarry Bay site.

Action

21

(b) Mr LAM Sum-lim was supportive of the LCSD’s provision of more

recreational facilities to improve the public’s quality of life. In recent years, Hong Kong athletes had obtained brilliant results. He suggested the LCSD promote local sports development by fully utilising the site at Aldrich Bay to construct a multi-purpose sports complex and start a feasibility study as soon as possible.

(c) Mr Howard CHEUNG enquired of the LCSD about its selection

criteria of sports and recreational facilities projects for conducting feasibility study. He also invited the LCSD to explain whether it would call off the follow-up on constructing a swimming pool in Quarry Bay area after its implementation of the proposed project on the Aldrich Bay sports centre and leisure facilities for the open space. He hoped that the LCSD would support the selection of the Aldrich Bay site with precise justifications and would also make a commitment to continue its study on the feasibility of constructing a swimming pool at the Quarry Bay site.

(d) Mr NGAN Chun-lim was supportive of the LCSD’s provision of more

recreational and sports facilities in the Eastern District. He hoped that the LCSD would start the feasibility study on the construction of Aldrich Bay sports centre and leisure facilities for the open space as soon as possible.

(e) Mr CHENG Chi-sing pointed out that upon the construction of the

headquarters of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), the Government had made a commitment to reconstruct a football pitch in the area and also provide swimming pool facilities. The LCSD also made a commitment to consider providing a swimming pool when developing Quarry Bay Park Phase II. He hoped that the LCSD could honour its commitment.

(f) Mr Dominic WONG pointed out that despite the promotion of the

“Sports for All” culture by the Home Affairs Bureau (HAB), some recreational facilities were far away from the residences of members of the public. Members of the public would need to travel to the recreational facilities by taking transportation and thus would suffer from inconvenience when they would like to do sports during the leisure time in their busy lives. He hoped that the HAB could

Action

22

provide advice at the policy level to increase the sports facilities in the Eastern District.

29. Mr Eddie LO of the LCSD responded to the views and enquiries of Members as follows:

(a) At present, three swimming pool complexes had been provided by the LCSD in the Eastern District and the guidelines set out in the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines, which stated that two swimming pool complexes should be provided in the district, had been abided by. However, the LCSD would still study the suggestions of constructing additional swimming pools.

(b) In Policy Address 2017, the Government announced that it would

conduct technical feasibility studies for 15 projects of sports and recreational facilities so as to make preparation for the commencement of the projects. The project of constructing the Aldrich Bay sports centre and leisure facilities for the open space adjacent to Tung Hei Road in Shau Kei Wan (i.e., next to Aldrich Garden) was one of those projects. The LCSD would work with the policy bureau(x) and department(s) concerned to examine the development of that site.

(c) The site reserved for the project proposal of Quarry Bay Park Phase II

(Stages 2 and 3) was currently used by various government departments for temporary purposes. The LCSD would pay close attention to the relocating schedules of the departments concerned and would conduct a comprehensive study on the suggestions regarding the development of that site together with the bureau(x) and department(s) concerned.

All attendees 30. After discussion, the PWHC agreed to continue to follow up on this matter.

(iii) Making a Strong Request to Put the Open Space at the Junction of Siu Sai

Wan Road and Harmony Road into Use as soon as possible 31. Members noted the written replies from the departments concerned.

All attendees 32. After discussion, the PWHC agreed to continue to follow up on this matter. (iv) Making a Request to Change the Triangular Provisional Land next to Heng

Action

23

Fa Chuen Bus Terminal into Permanent Motorcycle Parking Spaces

33. Members noted the written replies from the departments concerned.

All attendees 34. After discussion, the PWHC agreed to continue to follow up on this matter. (v) Requesting the Government to Handle Properly the Problem of Shortage of

Ancillary Facilities for Living in the Estate after the Sale of Hing Man Commercial Centre

Requesting the Government to Handle the Problems arising from the Change of Ownership of the Commercial Centre of Hing Man Estate and Take Care of the Basic Daily Needs of Residents

35. Miss Rose CHAN of the HD gave a supplementary explanation on the latest progress of the matter. 36. The views and enquiries of 2 Members about the matter are summarised as follows:

(a) Mr CHUI Chi-kin indicated that according to an advertisement on a public light bus, an educational organisation would start its service in the Hing Man Commercial Centre in future. He hoped that the HD could impose close monitoring on the situation to ensure that such use would remain in line with the land lease conditions of the commercial centre. Besides, he hoped that the HD would allow tenants to establish stalls in public areas during the renovation of the commercial centre in order to facilitate residents, particularly the elderly, in their purchase of daily necessities without the need for travelling elsewhere.

(b) Mr LAU Hing-yeung expressed gratitude for the HD’s consistent

follow-up efforts on the renovation of the Hing Man Commercial Centre. He understood that the works layout of a bakery had been approved and that clinic services would be available in the commercial centre. He hoped that the HD would continue to monitor the works progress for facilitating expeditious completion of the works by the property owner. He also hoped that the HD would discuss with the property owner about the relocation arrangements for the affected sitting-out facilities in Hing Man Estate.

37. Miss Rose CHAN of the HD responded to the views and enquiries of

Action

24

Members as follows:

(a) As certain structural works proposals were not approved after they had been submitted to the Independent Checking Unit, the owner of the commercial centre had engaged an additional consultancy firm on structural works and had already submitted revised designs in order to make best endeavour to catch up with project schedules. The completion date of the works in Phase I was expected to be delayed to March while the remaining works would be completed in September.

(b) The supermarket, the automatic teller machine and the bakery run by a

social enterprise in the estate were operating to meet residents’ needs for purchasing daily necessities.

(c) Apart from introducing major shop tenants, the owner of the

commercial centre had also preliminarily planned to make lettings available for convenience stores, clinics and food and beverages shops. Nevertheless, the final outcome would be subject to the responses to the lettings received in the free market.

(d) The HD held an open-minded attitude to the establishment of

temporary shops or marketplaces in the estate. Interested persons could submit applications to the department(s) concerned in accordance with existing mechanisms.

(e) The HD had reached an agreement with the owner of the commercial

centre and would deploy the estate’s public areas fund, which was jointly financed by the Housing Authority and the owner, to purchase sitting-out facilities for the estate.

(f) The HD would continue to maintain close communication with the

owner of the commercial centre and resolve difficulties through discussion and negotiation. The latest progress would be reported to the PWHC.

All attendees 38. After discussion, the PWHC agreed to continue to follow up on this matter.

(vi) The Revised Proposal on the Boardwalk at the Eastern District Promenade

Action

25

submitted to the Harbourfront Commission by CEDD / Replanning - Establishment of the North Point Waterfront Park

39. The views and enquiries of 4 Members about the matter are summarised as follows:

(a) Mr LAM Sum-lim hoped that the CEDD could revise the design proposal of the boardwalk as soon as possible and also consult the EDC as soon as possible.

(b) Mr Patrick WONG indicated that the general public expected the

expeditious completion of the boardwalk and he expressed disappointment at the CEDD’s failure to finalise the proposal after repeated consultations. He enquired of the CEDD about the estimated date of the revised proposal’s completion, the schedule of its submission to the LegCo and the blueprint of the project as a whole.

(c) Mr Howard CHEUNG spoke on behalf of Mr Andrew CHIU that he

hoped the CEDD would meet Members of different political camps in advance and discuss the project proposal with them before consulting the EDC again so that more opinions could be gathered before the formal meeting.

(d) Mr CHENG Tat-hung enquired of the CEDD about the estimated date

of the revised proposal’s completion and whether the CEDD would consult District Councillors before putting forward the revised proposal. In addition, he wanted to know whether the DEVB and the CEDD were following up on the suggestion of establishing the North Point waterfront park.

40. Mr Godfrey HO of the CEDD and Mr Eddie LO of the LCSD responded to the views and enquiries of Members as follows: CEDD

(a) The consultancy firm engaged by the CEDD was revising the boardwalk’s design proposal and was expected to report to the EDC about the latest proposal in mid-2018. The CEDD would meet various stakeholders before consulting the EDC again.

Action

26

(b) The CEDD would work with the DEVB together to follow up on the suggestion of establishing the North Point waterfront park.

LCSD

(c) The waterfront area which the PWHC agreed on replanning on 10 October 2017 did not cover the project of relocating the Tin Chiu Street Playground. Therefore, the LCSD was applying for funding to implement the playground relocation proposal supported by the District Facilities Management Committee on 12 September 2017.

(d) The LCSD would pay heed to the study conducted on the development

of North Point waterfront area by the bureau(x) and department(s) concerned and also provide advice on the matters related to the open space.

All attendees 41. After discussion, the PWHC agreed to continue to follow up on this matter.

(vii) Concern over the Ageing Problem of Old Buildings and Request for

Enhanced Inspection on External Walls of Buildings 42. Mr LAM Sum-lim opined that the repair and maintenance of buildings involved complicated procedures and thus hoped that the BD could enhance its support to the owners of old buildings (particularly those owners of “three nil” buildings without building management companies) through the Operation Building Bright 2.0. 43. Mr YUNG Shu-yan of the BD indicated that the BD had always been assigning representatives to follow up on the matters of building repair and maintenance in the district. The BD had also been meeting the residents on a regular basis and providing a telephone hotline to provide support for the residents in need.

All attendees 44. After discussion, the PWHC agreed to follow up on this matter upon further progress. (viii) Concern about Drinking Water Safety in Oi Tung Estate 45. Mr LAU Wai-leung of the WSD gave a supplementary explanation on the latest progress of the matter.

Action

27

46. The views and enquiries of 3 Members about the matter are summarised as follows:

(a) Mr NGAN Chun-lim indicated that after the occurrence of the incident, residents deemed that there had been marked improvement on the water quality. Besides, he suggested the HD inform the residents before tank cleansing so that they could prepare for it in advance.

(b) Mr Patrick WONG was worried about the condition of water pipelines

installed at similar periods. He enquired whether the WSD was planning to replace other water pipelines which were potentially subject to the ageing problem or to install more strainers in order to ensure the water quality.

(c) The Vice-chairman enquired whether the WSD would restore the

original water supply routes after altering the water supply routes and installing strainers.

47. Mr LAU Wai-leung of the WSD and Mr POON Chi-chung of the HD responded to the views and enquiries of Members as follows: WSD

(a) The WSD had ceased to utilise water pipelines with protection layer made of asphalt since 2003. As some other places on Hong Kong Island were also installed with the problematic pipelines, the WSD was planning to engage a consultancy firm in 2018 to reassess the condition of the problematic pipelines and put forward improvement proposals.

(b) After the completion of restoration works, the WSD would reopen the original water supply routes.

HD

(c) The HD would remind the building management companies to display prominent notices before cleansing water tanks to facilitate residents’ timely preparation.

Action

28

All attendees 48. After discussion, the PWHC agreed not to follow up on this matter. (ix) Request for a Full Review and Improvement of the Underground Drainage

System of the Eastern District, Safeguarding the Life and Property of the Public Urging the Government to Give an Account of the Severe Floods Caused by Heavy Rain in Chai Wan Requesting the Government to Express Concern about the Damage Caused by Heavy Rain on 19 October 2016 and Study Flood Prevention Measures Issues Relating to the Floods at the Roundabout in Chai Wan

All attendees 49. The matter was to be discussed at alternate meetings and would thus be

followed up at the meeting in April 2018. (x) Request to Build a Sports Complex at the Open Space Next to Quarry Bay

Park Phase II

All attendees 50. The matter was to be discussed every six months and would thus be followed up at the meeting in April 2018. (xi) Request to Follow Up Immediately the Issue of Noise Barriers at Blocks 16

and 17 of Heng Fa Chuen

All attendees 51. The PWHC would follow up on this matter upon further progress. (xii) Requesting the Housing Department to Install Automatic Sensor Systems in

the Escalators in Public Housing Estates

All attendees 52. The PWHC would follow up on this matter upon further progress. (xiii) Proposal to Reprovision Chai Wan Ambulance Station and Construct

Departmental Quarters at the Junction of Sun Yip Street and Siu Sai Wan Road, Chai Wan

All attendees 53. The PWHC would follow up on this matter upon further progress.

(xiv) Request for Provision of Escalators in Braemar Hill area

Request the Government to Speed Up the Construction of an Escalator to Go Directly to Braemar Hill Results of the Feasibility Study of the Pedestrian Link in Braemar Hill

Action

29

Consultation Regarding the Preliminary Design of Braemar Hill Pedestrian Link Consultation Regarding the Design of Braemar Hill Pedestrian Link

54. The matter had been discussed under agenda item VIII.

(xv) Request for Installation of Automatic Glass Doors at all Major Entrances

and Exits of Shopping Centres under Link REIT

All attendees 55. The PWHC would follow up on this matter upon further progress. (xvi) Water Supplies Department Headquarters with Hong Kong and Islands

Regional Office and Correctional Services Department Headquarters

All attendees 56. The PWHC would follow up on this matter upon further progress. (xvii) Concern over the Development Plan for the Site Next to Quarry Bay

Promenade at Hoi Yu Street Follow Up On the Proposed Construction of a 25-storey Industrial Building at the Quarry Bay Promenade Near the Exit of the Pet Garden at Hoi Yu Street

All attendees 57. The PWHC would follow up on this matter upon further progress.

X. Date of the Next Meeting 58. The meeting ended at 6:00 pm. The 3rd meeting of the PWHC would be held at 2:30 pm on 10 April 2018 (Tuesday). Eastern District Council Secretariat April 2018