Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
AECOM in association with MVA Hong Kong Ltd.
Public Engagement Report
Agreement No. CE 35/2010 (CE)
September 2014
Review and Update of the Railway Development Strategy 2000
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page i Setember 2014
Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background of the Study ............................................................................................ 1 1.2 Study Focus and Methodology ................................................................................... 4 1.3 Structure of the Report ............................................................................................... 6
2. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROGRAMME................................................................ 7 2.1 Purpose of Public Engagement .................................................................................. 7 2.2 Overview ..................................................................................................................... 7
3. OVERALL SUMMARY OF VIEWS ON KEY TOPICS ............................................. 9 3.1 Overview ..................................................................................................................... 9 3.2 Broad Principles ......................................................................................................... 9 3.3 Comprehensive Review of Roles of Different Public Transport Modes ................... 11 3.4 Principles of Railway Development .......................................................................... 11 3.5 Funding of Railway Development ............................................................................. 12 3.6 Methods to Increase Patronage and Enhance Railway Service .............................. 12 3.7 Hong Kong-Shenzhen Western Express Line (WEL) .............................................. 14 3.8 Northern Link (NOL) ................................................................................................. 18 3.9 Tuen Mun to Tsuen Wan Link (TMTWL) .................................................................. 21 3.10 North Island Line (NIL) ............................................................................................. 24 3.11 Siu Sai Wan Line (SSWL) ........................................................................................ 28 3.12 South Island Line (West) (SIL(W)) ........................................................................... 31 3.13 Tuen Mun South Extension (TMS Extension) .......................................................... 35 3.14 Hung Shui Kiu Station (HSK Station) ....................................................................... 38 3.15 Tung Chung West Extension (TCW Extension) ....................................................... 40 3.16 Kwu Tung Station (KTU Station) .............................................................................. 42
4. CONCLUSION AND WAY FORWARD ................................................................. 45
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page ii Setember 2014
Appendices Appendix I – Dissemination of Information about the PE Exercise Appendix II – Public Engagement Activities Appendix III – Other Suggestions from the Public on the Ten Proposed Railway
Schemes during Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the Public Engagement Exercise
Other Suggestions from the Public on New Railway Proposals during Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the Public Engagement Exercise
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 1 September 2014
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
1.1.1 The Government commissioned AECOM Asia Company Limited (the
consultant) in March 2011 to carry out a Review and Update of the
Railway Development Strategy 2000 (RDS-2000). The objective of the
study is to update the long-term railway development blueprint formulated
in the RDS-2000 having regard to the latest development of our society.
1.1.2 When the RDS-2000 was announced in May 2000, only six railway lines
and the Light Rail were operating in Hong Kong (see Fig. 1.1). To
implement the policy of using railways as the backbone of Hong Kong’s
passenger transport system, the local railway network expanded rapidly
with eight railway projects completed between 2002 and 2009.
1.1.3 Currently, the total number of daily public transport passenger trips in
Hong Kong exceeds 10 million. Hong Kong’s railway network carries over
4.5 million passengers per day, accounting for about 38% of all public
transport passenger trips. The Government is taking forward five railway
projects in full swing. They are the West Island Line, South Island Line
(East), Kwun Tong Line Extension, Hong Kong Section of the Guangzhou-
Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link, and Shatin to Central Link (see
Fig. 1.2). These five railway projects are expected to be commissioned in
succession between the end of 2014 / early 2015 and 2020 / 2021. Upon
completion, the total length of railways in Hong Kong will be increased to
more than 270 km. There will be 99 railway stations and 68 Light Rail
stations, serving areas inhabited by more than 70% of the local population
and forming an easily accessible mass transit network. It is anticipated
that the rail share of local public transport trips will increase to 43%, which
further underlines the Government’s policy of using railways as the
backbone of the passenger transport system.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 2 September 2014
1.1.4 As stated by the Chief Executive in the Policy Address in January 2013,
public demand for land is generated as much from the surging population
as from people’s aspirations for more space to alleviate their cramped
living conditions. The Government will continue to adopt a multi-pronged
approach and step up its efforts to meet housing and other needs. For this
purpose, the Government will increase the supply of land in the short,
medium and long term through optimal use of developed land and
identifying new land for development at the same time. Amongst these
measures, some longer-term ones include planning the North East New
Territories New Development Areas (NENT NDAs) and Hung Shui Kiu
New Development Area (HSK NDA), developing the New Territories North
and Lantau Island (including conducting the Tung Chung New Town
Extension Study to explore the potential of developing Tung Chung into a
new town with more comprehensive and better developed community
facilities), reviewing the deserted agricultural land in North District and
Yuen Long etc., with a view to building up a “land reserve” to meet future
demands in a timely manner and improve the living environment of the
citizens.
1.1.5 Development of railway transport will not only significantly speed up
passenger flow, alleviate road traffic congestion and reduce vehicle-
induced air pollution, but also release the development potential of
peripheral areas and facilitate local developments and economic activities.
If railway planning and land development can be properly integrated, there
would be synergy in broadening the living space for residents and
promoting developments in various aspects in Hong Kong.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 3 September 2014
Fig. 1.1: Hong Kong’s Railway Network in 2000
Fig. 1.2: Hong Kong’s Railway Network in 2021
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 4 September 2014
1.2 Study Focus and Methodology
1.2.1 In general, our study and consultation work were conducted in two stages,
with a view to recommending a new railway development blueprint that
was fast, convenient, reliable, environmental friendly and could meet the
needs of the society.
1.2.2 For the Stage 1 Study, we conducted passenger transport demand
forecasts and reviewed the demand for major railway corridors serving key
development areas. The three major regional railway corridors (see Fig. 1.3) are
The Hong Kong-Shenzhen Western Express Line
The Northern Link
The Coastal Railway between Tuen Mun and Tsuen Wan (Tuen Mun to Tsuen Wan Link)
Fig. 1.3: Major Regional Corridors proposed in the Stage 1 Study
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 5 September 2014
1.2.3 The Stage 2 Study focused on optimisation and integration of the railway
network and study of local enhancement schemes to increase the overall
capacity of the railway network and reduce road-based transport needs.
The seven local enhancement schemes (see Fig. 1.4) are:
The North Island Line
The Siu Sai Wan Line
The South Island Line (West)
The Tuen Mun South Extension
The Hung Shui Kiu Station
The Tung Chung West Extension
The Kwu Tung Station
Fig. 1.4: Local Enhancement Schemes proposed in the Stage 2 Study
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 6 September 2014
1.2.4 Upon completion of the Stage 2 PE exercise, we collated the public
opinions at both stages, such that the planning of the major regional
corridors and local enhancement schemes could be further optimised in a
comprehensive manner. We would provide the Government with
recommendations on future railway development which served as the
basis for the formulation of the future railway development strategy in
Hong Kong.
1.3 Structure of the Report
1.3.1 This report summarises views and suggestions received from the public
through different channels during the PE period. A short summary is
provided on the conclusion and way forward for formulating the railway
development strategy for Hong Kong.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 7 September 2014
2. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROGRAMME
2.1 Purpose of Public Engagement
2.1.1 Railway projects involve enormous investment of public funds and have
profound impact on society, people’s livelihood and economic
development. Therefore, different sectors of the society may offer diverse
views. The issue on how to cohesively integrate railway planning and land
development will need to be examined within the community of Hong
Kong.
2.1.2 It often takes eight to ten years for a railway project to take shape from
idea formulation, conceptual stage, stakeholder consultation, detailed
design, to actual construction and completion. Early consultation will
enable the public to discuss and participate in the planning process, so
that the Government can work together with the public to map out Hong
Kong’s future railway development to meet transport demand in a cost-
effective manner. This will facilitate the commencement of relevant
detailed studies of individual projects in a timely manner.
2.2 Overview
2.2.1 Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the PE exercise were conducted from 20 April to
21 July 2012 and from 21 February to 20 May 2013 respectively. At the
commencement of each stage of the PE exercise, various forms of
publicity were launched to raise public awareness of the study. PE
publications and a website were prepared to enable the public to gain a
better understanding of the study background, preliminary study findings,
and conceptual schemes of the major regional railway corridors as well as
local enhancement schemes.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 8 September 2014
2.2.2 Various forms of media, including website, on-line forum, email and other
communication channels such as hotline, fax and post were used as
platforms for the public to provide views, comments and suggestions on
different railway schemes. Details of the various means used in
information dissemination are summarised in Appendix I.
2.2.3 To facilitate public engagement and encourage interaction, a range of PE
activities were organised. They included eight Public Forums, four Focus
Group Meetings, over 30 briefing sessions to District Councils and Heung
Yee Kuk as well as meetings with academics, professionals and business
sectors. Details of these PE activities are summarised in Appendix II.
2.2.4 Over 11,600 written submissions were received during the two stages of
PE exercise. Verbal comments were also received at the public forums,
focus group meetings and through the hotline. The numbers of entries
received through different communication channels during each stage of
the PE exercise are summarised in the table below:
Communication Channels No. of Entries Received During
Stage 1 PE Stage 2 PE Email 115 663 Fax 74 19 Post 35 4,482 Other Written Submission 32 2,018 Website Post 1,209 2,956 Online Forum 20 19 Total 1,485 10,157
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 9 September 2014
3. OVERALL SUMMARY OF VIEWS ON KEY TOPICS
3.1 Overview
3.1.1 In the course of the PE exercise, 8 Public Forums, 4 Focus Group
Meetings and over 30 briefing sessions were held. Over 11,600 written
submissions and many verbal comments were received.
3.1.2 The study proposals were generally welcomed by the public. Overall
views on the proposals are presented below –
3.2 Broad Principles
3.2.1 The public generally agreed that railway should be the backbone of the
passenger transportation system in Hong Kong and supported the
Government’s effort in planning for a strategic railway network and land
use development in an integrated manner. The majority agreed that
population distribution, land use planning and housing development were
key factors in determining the alignment and feasibility of new railway
development. Some professionals and scholars suggested that the study
team should comprehensively review the whole Railway Development
Strategy with other ongoing plans and studies, such as the “Enhancing
Land Supply Strategy”, to provide strategic insights for Hong Kong’s future
development.
3.2.2 Some scholars and green groups suggested that ecological and
environmental impact, carbon emissions and socio-economic impact of
railway proposals should be studied to understand the net environmental
and social gains to the community in addition to the economic benefits
derived from the new railway projects.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 10 September 2014
3.2.3 Many professionals and scholars considered that the user-pay and cost-
recovery principles would no longer be applicable and a decreasing rate of
return for railway proposals was expected because the demand for future
railways would be based on social needs rather than economic growth.
Some suggested that, since capital investment from the Government
would be required for new railway development, the Government should
treat future railway development as public works projects so that the
considerations of accessibility and connectivity would be prioritised ahead
of financial returns.
3.2.4 The general public, professionals and scholars suggested that more
information on the estimated cost, time saving, patronage, technical
feasibility, overall environmental performance as well as cost-benefit
analysis for different schemes should be made available for their
consideration.
3.2.5 The majority also pointed out that the average train loading figures in the
PE Digest might not be able to truly reflect the congestion in train
compartments during peak hours. As shown in the PE Digest, the average
train loading during peak hours in some sections was around 60% to 70%,
but from passengers’ perspective, the train compartments were very full
and unpleasant. They suggested that the figures on design capacity
should be reviewed.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 11 September 2014
3.3 Comprehensive Review of Roles of Different Public Transport Modes
3.3.1 Many members of the public, professionals and scholars suggested that a
new Comprehensive Transport Study should be carried out to define the
roles of different public transport modes; to determine the priority of
developing different types of modes; and to study how multimodal
integration and connections between modes could be carried out. Some
professionals and scholars, as well as transport operators opined that
competition among different public transport modes should be allowed,
and overemphasis on railway development might lead to misallocation of
resources which would in turn increase the operation cost for both the
MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) and other road-based transport
operators and eventually the burden of the general public.
3.3.2 While it was generally agreed that railway should continue to serve the
highly demanded corridors, many operators of road-based public transport
modes had strong reservations about providing new railways to serve
corridors with medium or low traffic demand.
3.4 Principles of Railway Development
3.4.1 The majority agreed that land use and transport should be planned in an
integrated manner, and new developments should be concentrated to a
smaller number of new areas with a higher density to enhance the
connectivity of less accessible areas and the viability of the railway
service. Some respondents opined that “Transit-Oriented Development”
should be promoted to further increase the patronage. However, some
professionals and scholars expressed that the new developments should
not be triggered solely to support railway development, as consideration
should also be given to urban morphology and overall future planning.
Besides, the social and environmental impact of high density development
should be carefully assessed.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 12 September 2014
3.4.2 Some professionals and scholars pointed out that the current practice of
railway planning was transport-demand driven or traffic-congestion-relief
driven and as a result the proposed new railway lines were converging
towards the traditional Central Business Districts (CBDs) and might cause
congestion there. They suggested that new railway planning should be
growth-demand driven and the future railways should facilitate the shifting
of business functions from traditional CBDs to new towns in the North
West New Territories (NWNT), or other new development areas, such as
Kowloon East and West Kowloon Cultural District, so that future
developments would be more evenly distributed and decentralised, and
more job opportunities would be created in these new development areas.
3.5 Funding of Railway Development
3.5.1 The majority considered that if new railway lines were not financially
viable, subsidy by the Government or from other railway lines might be
considered. However, some suggested that suitable forms of railways or
other types of public transport modes, such as medium capacity railways,
Bus Rapid Transit, electric buses etc., should also be considered as
alternatives in the long term.
3.6 Methods to Increase Patronage and Enhance Railway Service
3.6.1 The public suggested that the Government should aim at providing a fast
and affordable public transportation system. Some professionals
suggested that railway should not be built to serve the peak hour traffic
demand only. Measures should be taken to enhance the average
utilisation of the railways. In this regard, many suggested that different
concession schemes, such as “monthly pass” for different lines, greater
fare reduction at “MTR Fare Saver” or more concession schemes for the
elderly and people with disabilities, should be explored.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 13 September 2014
3.6.2 Some scholars and professionals opined that since the existing railway
network had already covered a lot of developed areas, the increase in
ridership and catchment by new railway lines or stations would be limited.
Therefore, the marginal benefit of developing new railway lines might not
justify the cost. In this regard, they suggested that more efforts should be
made to enhance the feeder services to existing stations to increase the
usage of existing railway lines.
3.6.3 Some members of the public and professionals suggested that the
pedestrian connection around railway stations should be improved to
increase the patronage of existing railway lines. Examples include: from
Central Station to the new waterfront, from Exhibition Station to the Wan
Chai district, from Tamar Station to Admiralty, from Tsuen Wan Station to
Tsuen Wan West Station, from Causeway Bay Station to Happy Valley,
from Tin Hau Station to Victoria Park, from Austin Station to Kowloon
Station and Jordan Station, etc.
3.6.4 Some members of the public suggested that park-and-ride service should
be enhanced at railway stations in order to encourage more bicycle riders
to use the railway service. There were suggestions that pets and bicycles
should be allowed on train compartments and more should be done to
improve services for the elderly and the disabled.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 14 September 2014
3.7 Hong Kong-Shenzhen Western Express Line (WEL)
Fig. 3.1: Preliminary Conceptual Scheme of the WEL
The following key consultation points were provided in the PE materials to
facilitate public participation.
In your opinion, how may the Main Line and Cross Boundary Spur Line of
the WEL be planned to facilitate Hong Kong residents travelling to the
western Shenzhen and other areas?
What are your views regarding the Domestic Spur Line connecting Tuen
Mun and Siu Ho Wan proposed by the consultant? If technically feasible,
where do you think the Domestic Spur Line should connect at each end?
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 15 September 2014
Why?
In your opinion, how should the three components of the WEL proposed
by the consultant (i.e. the Main Line, Cross-boundary Spur Line and
Domestic Spur Line) be phased for development if the WEL is to be
implemented?
In general, under what circumstances would you support the
implementation of the WEL? Why?
Overview
3.7.1 Some members of the public supported the WEL because it would
enhance economic development, while many others considered that the
WEL should be supported only if there was a strong traffic demand.
3.7.2 There were mixed views on the three components and the phasing of the
WEL. Some suggested that priority should be given to the Domestic Spur
Line which was considered more beneficial to local residents. On the
other hand, some public views showed support to implement all three
components together, which would enhance the connection between Hong
Kong and Shenzhen and make the WEL more viable and cost-effective. A
number of professionals and scholars and some members of the public
supported the railway corridor to link up the Shenzhen Bao’an International
Airport, Qianhai, Hung Shui Kiu, Tuen Mun and the Hong Kong
International Airport.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 16 September 2014
Main Line
3.7.3 Although some agreed on the need for the railway line, there were doubts
on the cost-effectiveness of the Main Line. Some suggested that a station
at Hung Shui Kiu or Tuen Mun should be built to enhance the financial
viability of the Main Line.
3.7.4 Many members of the public and some professionals and scholars
expressed concern on the market demand of the Main Line, and
suggested that it should be implemented only if there were clear division of
labour and agreement between the Shenzhen Bao’an International Airport
and the Hong Kong International Airport to ensure the latter could be
operated as an air transit hub.
Cross-boundary Spur Line
3.7.5 Some members of the public supported the Cross-boundary Spur Line as
they considered that it could enhance the connection between Hong Kong
and Qianhai to facilitate economic development in the NWNT. Many
professionals and scholars considered that the patronage and demand for
the Cross-boundary Spur Line would likely be higher than the Main Line,
and it should thus be given the top priority among the three components.
3.7.6 Some professionals and scholars suggested that the Cross-boundary Spur
Line or the Domestic Spur Line would provide opportunities for developing
Hung Shui Kiu or Tuen Mun as new economic and social centres in the
NWNT, which would encourage economic growth and create employment.
3.7.7 However, some were worried that there might not be sufficient patronage,
and therefore suggested that it should also connect to Tin Shui Wai or
Tuen Mun, or the three components of the WEL should be combined into
one to enhance the overall financial viability.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 17 September 2014
Domestic Spur Line
3.7.8 Some members of the public, professionals and scholars suggested
connecting the Domestic Spur Line to Tuen Mun South and the West Rail
Line so as to facilitate north-south movement in the New Territories and
link up the West Rail Line and the Tung Chung Line. Some suggested
that railway connection between Tuen Mun and Lantau Island should be
provided to enhance the tourism development of Lantau Island.
3.7.9 Some members of the public considered that the Domestic Spur Line to
Tung Chung might not be necessary as the current public transport
services were sufficient.
Environmental Considerations
3.7.10 A number of green group expressed concern on the potential ecological
impact of the construction of the WEL. They were worried that it might
affect the ecologically sensitive wetlands in the Deep Bay area and marine
ecology near Urmston Road between Tuen Mun and the Hong Kong
International Airport, where Chinese White Dolphins were found.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 18 September 2014
3.8 Northern Link (NOL)
Fig. 3.2: Preliminary Conceptual Scheme of the NOL
3.8.1 The following key consultation points were provided in the PE materials to
facilitate public participation.
Do you think that the NOL should be more focused on supporting the NDAs (i.e.
the NOL connecting with the Lok Ma Chau Spur Line at Kwu Tung), or facilitating
cross-boundary passengers to travel to the Mainland (i.e. connecting with the
Lok Ma Chau Spur Line at Lok Ma Chau)? Why?
Should the NOL be implemented, do you agree that the development density of
the rural areas along the railway should be increased at the same time, in order
to render the NOL more cost-effective and make better use of land resources with
efficient transport facilities? Why?
In general, under what circumstances would you support the implementation of
the NOL? Why?
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 19 September 2014
If the patronage of the NOL is inadequate to support its operation financially,
should it be subsidised by the Government or from other railway lines? Are there
any other funding methods?
Overview
3.8.2 The general public supported early implementation of the NOL to enhance
east-west connection in the New Territories and cross-boundary traffic.
The majority considered that the NOL would form a loop by connecting the
West Rail Line and the East Rail Line to enhance connectivity. In general,
the public, professionals and scholars were optimistic towards the financial
viability of the NOL. In case of insufficient patronage to support its
financial viability, some members of the public supported subsidy by the
Government, or cross-subsidy by other railway lines.
Functions of the NOL
3.8.3 There were diverse public views on the functions of the NOL and whether
the NOL should be connected to Kwu Tung or Lok Ma Chau.
3.8.4 Many members of the public considered that the NOL should connect to
Kwu Tung to support the development of NDAs and enhance the east-
west connection in the New Territories. Some members of the public,
professionals and scholars regarded the NOL as an effective solution to
relieve the crowdedness of the East Rail Line. Some members of the
public suggested that connecting the NOL to Kwu Tung would allow future
extensions to Fanling North and Ping Che/Ta Kwu Ling to support the
developments there. However, some local residents living in those areas
opposed to such extensions since they were worried that the local
community would be severely affected.
3.8.5 From a regional perspective, some professionals, scholars and members
of the public preferred connecting the NOL to Lok Ma Chau to facilitate
people travelling between the NWNT and Shenzhen and help divert cross-
boundary passengers from the East Rail Line.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 20 September 2014
3.8.6 Some members of the public considered that the NOL should support the
development of NDAs, enhance the east-west connection in the New
Territories and facilitate cross-boundary transportation, and therefore
suggested that the NOL should connect to both Kwu Tung and Lok Ma
Chau. There were also suggestions that the NOL should connect to Yuen
Long Station instead of Kam Sheung Road Station.
Development Density
3.8.7 Many members of the public agreed that development density of the rural
area along the railway could be increased to enhance the cost-
effectiveness of the NOL. However, in view of the potential impact on
wetland areas along the alignment, some respondents and green groups
opposed to the increase of development density of these areas.
3.8.8 Some respondents also suggested that stations should be added at Au
Tau, Ngau Tam Mei and San Tin to facilitate future developments.
3.8.9 Some respondents and local residents who had reservations about the
development of NDAs considered that there was no need to develop the
NOL to serve the NDAs.
Environmental Considerations
3.8.10 There were concerns that the development of the NOL might destroy the
environment and speed up urbanisation in the rural area. Some green
groups expressed concern on the impact of the NOL on ecologically
sensitive areas along its alignment, including Mai Po Nature Reserve,
fishponds, wetlands, egretry and agricultural farm lands. They urged the
Government to protect the existing natural environment and adhere to the
“No Net Loss on Wetland” principle when implementing the NOL.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 21 September 2014
3.9 Tuen Mun to Tsuen Wan Link (TMTWL)
Fig. 3.3: Preliminary Conceptual Scheme of the TMTWL
3.9.1 The following key consultation points were provided in the PE materials to
facilitate public participation.
The development density of the coastal area along Tuen Mun to Tsuen
Wan is not high. Should the TMTWL be implemented, do you think that
the development density along the railway should be increased at the
same time, in order to render the TMTWL more cost-effective and make
better use of the associated lands? Why?
In general, under what circumstances would you support the
implementation of the TMTWL?
If the patronage of the TMTWL is inadequate to support its operation
financially, should it be subsidised by the Government of from other
railway lines? Are there any other funding methods?
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 22 September 2014
Overview
3.9.2 The TMTWL was supported by some residents in Tuen Mun and Tsuen
Wan, as they considered that it would relieve the traffic congestion in the
districts and facilitate land, residential and economic development along
the coastline between Tuen Mun and Tsuen Wan.
3.9.3 However, the general public and many professionals and scholars
considered that the TMTWL would have a low demand and should be
considered only when the capacity of the West Rail Line was saturated. At
present, the West Rail Line, bus and ferry services were adequate to serve
the existing population. Some further pointed out that, after the upgrading
and widening of Tuen Mun Road and Castle Peak Road, the 22-minute
TMTWL could not compete well with the point-to-point bus service
currently serving the same corridor, and thus the demand for the TMTWL
would be limited. The respondents generally considered that the TMTWL
would not be cost-effective due to its limited patronage and local demand.
3.9.4 Green groups and some residents along the coastal area did not support
the TMTWL as it would cause negative landscape and visual impact to the
scenic coast.
Further Extensions of the TMTWL
3.9.5 Some members of the public suggested that increasing the development
density along the railway line by carrying out reclamation or developing
tourism industry would be able to increase the patronage of the TMTWL.
However, some residents along the coastal area between Tuen Mun and
Tsuen Wan had reservations about these proposals and preferred
maintaining the low development density along the coastal area.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 23 September 2014
3.9.6 There were many suggestions on enlarging the service catchment of the
proposed alignment to make the TMTWL more attractive. Some proposed
to connect the TMTWL to Shatin or Tai Wai, or to the East Rail Line, West
Rail Line, Tsuen Wan Line or Tung Chung Line. Some others suggested
that extensions to Tuen Mun Pier, Sham Tseng, Lai King, Kwai Chung or
Tsing Yi could also be considered.
Alternatives to the TMTWL
3.9.7 In view of the insufficient patronage and potential environmental and visual
impact, some professionals and members of the public suggested that the
TMTWL should be built in tunnels, and some suggested that other types of
public transport modes, such as ferry service, Bus Rapid Transit, light rail
system and automated people mover, should be considered. Some
members of the public suggested that extending the West Rail Line to
Tuen Mun South would be able to serve the demand in Tuen Mun.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 24 September 2014
3.10 North Island Line (NIL)
Fig. 3.4 Preliminary Conceptual Scheme of the “Swap” Scheme of North Island Line
Fig. 3.5: Preliminary Conceptual Scheme of the “Interchange” Scheme of North Island Line
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 25 September 2014
3.10.1 The following key consultation points were provided in the PE materials to
facilitate public participation.
If the North Island Line is to be implemented, would you prefer the “Swap”
Scheme or “Interchange” Scheme? Do you have other suggestions?
In general, under what circumstances would you support the
implementation of the North Island Line along the north shore of the Hong
Kong Island? Why?
Overview
3.10.2 The general public supported the NIL and believed that it would relieve the
congested Island Line by diverting passengers to use the new railway line.
However, some respondents had reservations about the NIL as it would
further intensify commercial development on the north shore of the Hong
Kong Island, leading to more pollution and traffic congestion.
3.10.3 While the NIL was generally supported by the public, preferences on the
“Swap” and “Interchange” Schemes were divided. Many professionals and
scholars suggested that more information on the travel patterns of
passengers, cost and benefit analysis and time savings of the two
schemes should be provided.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 26 September 2014
“Swap” Scheme
3.10.4 A number of members of the public and some professionals supported the
“Swap” Scheme as they considered that it would divert cross-harbour
passengers from the crowded Tsuen Wan Line and effectively relieve the
congestion of the Island Line. Some suggested that it would attract more
passengers from Kowloon East and the New Territories to the Hong Kong
Island since passengers from the Tseung Kwan O Line and Tung Chung
Line would be able to reach more destinations along the current Island
Line with fewer interchanges. With the enhanced connectivity between the
Hong Kong Island and Kowloon East, some professionals and scholars
considered that the “Swap” Scheme would stimulate commercial
development in Kowloon East.
3.10.5 However, some members of the public, especially the residents in Fortress
Hill and the Eastern District, opposed to the “Swap” Scheme since it would
break the Island Line up and cause inconvenience to residents in the
Eastern District, who would have to alter their established travelling habits
and interchange to the Tseung Kwan O Line to reach the central and
western parts of the Hong Kong Island. As a result, they might choose
other road-based public transportation.
3.10.6 The residents were also concerned about the reduction in train frequency
in the Eastern District in the “Swap” Scheme. Some professionals and
members of the public suggested that, in order to tackle the reduction of
train frequency due to the restrictions of Tsing Ma Bridge, some short-loop
services should be introduced on the NIL to maintain an adequate service
frequency along busy sections of the line.
3.10.7 Some members of the public expressed concern on the reliability of the
NIL under the “Swap” Scheme due to the relatively more technical
incidents, service disruptions or delays on the Tung Chung Line and
Tseung Kwan O Line. Therefore, they preferred the “Interchange”
Scheme, keeping the Island Line unaffected.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 27 September 2014
“Interchange” Scheme
3.10.8 Majority of the public, especially the residents in Fortress Hill and the
Eastern District, as well as some professionals supported the
“Interchange” Scheme, which would maintain the current service of the
Island Line and minimise disturbance to residents on the north shore of the
Hong Kong Island.
3.10.9 However, some were worried that if the “Interchange” Scheme was
adopted, the NIL would be less attractive to passengers since it would not
be able to serve the traditional CBDs that are currently served by the
Island Line. As a result, the “Interchange” Scheme would not be as
effective as the “Swap” Scheme in serving the purpose of diverting
passengers and relieving congestion on the Island Line.
Interchange between the NIL and the Existing Lines
3.10.10 Many respondents expressed concern on the interchange arrangement of
the NIL and stressed that the need of interchange should be minimised. If
interchanges were required, cross-platform interchange arrangement
should be allowed as far as possible. Many pointed out that some of the
current interchange designs, including those at the Hong Kong Station-
Central Station and the Quarry Bay Station, were not convenient and
should be avoided.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 28 September 2014
3.11 Siu Sai Wan Line (SSWL)
Fig. 3.6: Preliminary Conceptual Scheme of the SSWL
3.11.1 The following key consultation points were provided in the PE materials to
facilitate public participation.
Given the inadequate space for railway development in Siu Sai Wan,
would you accept demolishing existing buildings in the Eastern District or
conducting reclamation to construct the Siu Sai Wan Line? Why?
In general, under what circumstances would you support the
implementation of the Siu Sai Wan Line? Why?
Overview
3.11.2 Many residents in Siu Sai Wan and the Eastern District supported the
SSWL and mentioned that they had long been requesting the
implementation of the railway line to improve the local public transport
services.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 29 September 2014
3.11.3 However, many respondents had reservations about the financial viability
of the SSWL since the population of Siu Sai Wan was insufficient to
support a cost-effective railway extension, and the existing feeder services
were convenient to local residents. They suggested that efforts should be
made to relieve the congestion on the road network in Siu Sai Wan, and
the SSWL should be developed only when there were plans on further
developments in Siu Sai Wan.
3.11.4 Some scholars suggested that cost and benefit analysis of the SSWL and
a comprehensive review of the existing feeder services in Siu Sai Wan
should be carried out to assess the demand for and viability of the SSWL.
3.11.5 Some residents in Heng Fa Chuen were worried that the construction of
the SSWL might lead to adverse al impact on the environment of Heng Fa
Chuen.
“Extension” Scheme, “Bifurcation” Scheme and “Feeder” Scheme
3.11.6 Many Siu Sai Wan residents supported the SSWL but had no strong
preference on the three proposed schemes, namely the “Extension”,
“Bifurcation” and “Feeder” Schemes.
3.11.7 Some members of the public and residents in the Eastern District
supported the “Extension” Scheme since it would provide direct and
convenient railway service to Siu Sai Wan, while not affecting the existing
railway service to Chai Wan. However, some professionals and members
of the public considered that it was not worthwhile and fair to demolish
existing buildings in Chai Wan, which would affect many residents.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 30 September 2014
3.11.8 Some members of the public and residents in the Eastern District
supported the “Bifurcation” Scheme and pointed out that reclamation at the
Chai Wan Cargo Handling Basin could provide land for future
developments in Siu Sai Wan, making the SSWL more viable. Some
others, however, suggested that the SSWL should be built underground to
minimise such impact. Some also had reservations about reclamation as
it might create irreversible and permanent loss of marine habitats.
Besides, there were concerns on the reduction of train frequency to Chai
Wan under the “Bifurcation” Scheme.
3.11.9 With a view to avoiding the demolition of existing buildings and
reclamation which would cause considerable disturbance to the
community, some members of the public and residents in the Eastern
District preferred the “Feeder” Scheme since it would require less land
take. However, some professionals and members of the public pointed
out that the “Feeder” Scheme might not be viable and competitive given
the limited catchment of the railway station in Siu Sai Wan and the
availability of other convenient and flexible road-based feeder services
connecting Siu Sai Wan to existing railway stations.
3.11.10 Besides, many members of the public and professionals suggested that
other types of feeder services in Siu Sai Wan, such as light rail system,
rubber-tyred rail, automated people mover, extending the tram service and
enhancing the existing road-based feeder services, could also be
considered to enhance the overall feeder services in Siu Sai Wan.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 31 September 2014
3.12 South Island Line (West) (SIL(W))
Fig. 3.7: Preliminary Conceptual Schemes of the SIL(W)
3.12.1 The following key consultation points were provided in the PE materials to
facilitate public participation.
Do you agree that the Aberdeen Section and Pokfulam Section of the South
Island Line (West) may be developed in two phases and that railway service
should first be developed from Aberdeen to Wah Fu whereas provision be made
for the future extension to Pokfulam? Why?
Should the Pokfulam Section of the South Island Line (West) be implemented,
the addition of Queen Mary Hospital Station would have bearing on the alignment
design. As a result, the section near Cyberport could hardly be constructed in
tunnel, and might create visual impact along the alignment. Do you think it is
worthwhile to include a Queen Mary Hospital Station? Why?
In general, under what circumstances would you support the implementation of
the South Island Line (West)? Why?
Aberdeen Section Pokfulam Section
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 32 September 2014
Overview
3.12.2 There was general support for the implementation of the SIL(W) to relieve
the traffic congestion in the road network of Aberdeen and Pokfulam.
Majority of the public considered that the SIL(W) would complement the
future developments or redevelopment in the Southern District, such as
the potential redevelopment of Wah Fu and Tin Wan, and support IT
development in Cyberport. Some professionals suggested that extending
railway service to areas which were only served by buses and minibuses
would help reduce road traffic. Some members of the public,
professionals and scholars were concerned that the SIL(W) would have
significant social, environmental, ecological and landscape impact and
suggested that assessments should be carried out to examine these
impact of the SIL(W) when considering this new railway line.
3.12.3 Some taxi and minibus operators objected to the SIL(W) since Aberdeen,
Tin Wan and Wah Fu areas were currently well served by public
transportation and the railway line would seriously affect the market share
of other public transport modes.
3.12.4 Some professionals and scholars suggested that the SIL(W) would be
effective only if the interchange arrangement was convenient. They
pointed out that many passengers might need to interchange more than
once to reach their destinations, for example, residents in Aberdeen would
need to interchange twice when going to Central.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 33 September 2014
Implementation of the Aberdeen Section and the Pokfulam Section
3.12.5 There was general support for the Aberdeen Section. Many members of
the public considered that it would complement the future developments
and redevelopment in the Southern District, such as the redevelopment of
Wah Fu and Tin Wan.
3.12.6 There were reservations from some local residents of Pokfulam,
professionals and scholars about the need for the Pokfulam Section
because there were no major developments along its alignment and the
Pokfulam area was already well served by public transportation. Many
suggested that the Pokfulam Section would be supported if the whole
alignment was to be built underground so that the visual impact would be
minimised. Some members of the public suggested that the Pokfulam
Section would provide an alternative route to the urban area in addition to
the South Island Line (East) and help relieve the traffic congestion in
Pokfulam, benefitting the residents and workers in Pokfulam and
Cyberport.
Phasing of the South Island Line (West)
3.12.7 The general public had diverse views on whether the Aberdeen Section
and the Pokfulam Section should be built in one phase or two phases.
3.12.8 Many members of the public and residents in the Southern District
expressed the view that it would be more cost-effective to build the SIL(W)
in one phase. They were worried that if only the Aberdeen Section was
built, Wong Chuk Hang Station might not be able to handle the increased
number of passengers. As a result, people would still use road-based
transport modes and the congestion of the Aberdeen Tunnel could not be
effectively relieved.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 34 September 2014
3.12.9 In view of the imminent need for railway service from residents in
Aberdeen, Tin Wan and Wah Fu and for relieving the heavily congested
Aberdeen Tunnel, many members of the public and residents in the
Southern District considered that the Aberdeen Section should be given
priority and developed first. While there was general consensus on the
development of the Aberdeen Section in the local community, there were
some reservations from the local community in Pokfulam on the need and
design of the Pokfulam Section. Some members of the public and
professionals suggested that more detailed information on the estimated
cost for construction and maintenance, as well as cost and benefit analysis
on implementing the SIL(W) in one phase or two phases should be
provided to facilitate public discussion.
Need for Queen Mary Hospital Station
3.12.10 Some members of the public supported the addition of Queen Mary
Hospital Station since it would provide convenient railway service to
visitors, patients and hospital staff with minor visual impact. However,
some others considered that it was not worthwhile to include this station,
since there were no major developments near the hospital and the hospital
was already well served by other public transportation.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 35 September 2014
3.13 Tuen Mun South Extension (TMS Extension)
Fig. 3.8: Preliminary Conceptual Scheme of the TMS Extension
3.13.1 The following key consultation points were provided in the PE materials to
facilitate public participation.
To provide effective railway service in Tuen Mun South, do you consider
that the area near Tuen Mun Ferry Pier is the suitable location for
constructing a railway extension? Why?
Upon completion of the Tai Wai to Hung Hom Section of the Shatin to
Central Link, the West Rail Line will become a part of the East West
Corridor which runs through northwestern New Territories, East Tsim Sha
Tsui, Hung Hom, Kowloon East, Tai Wai, Ma On Shan and Wu Kai Sha.
To avoid congestion from arising along the East West Corridor, do you
agree that the way forward for the Tuen Mun South Extension should be
decided after the actual usage of the East West Corridor becomes
observable? Why?
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 36 September 2014
In general, under what circumstances would you support the
implementation of the Tuen Mun South Extension? Why?
Overview
3.13.2 The general public, especially Tuen Mun residents, supported the TMS
Extension since it would improve the public transport connectivity and
reduce travel time. They urged that the TMS Extension should be
implemented as soon as possible since there was an imminent demand
from the local community for the railway extension.
3.13.3 Some members of the public considered that the TMS Extension would
not only improve the public transport services from Tuen Mun South to the
urban area, but also enhance the connectivity between Yuen Long and
Tuen Mun Districts by relieving the congestion in the Light Rail network,
benefitting the local economy in Tuen Mun.
3.13.4 Some professionals were worried that the TMS Extension would only
serve the peak hour demand and therefore cost and benefit analysis
should be carried out to determine whether it should be built. Some
scholars suggested that since the Light Rail was serving Tuen Mun South,
implementing the TMS Extension would lead to duplication of transport
services and misallocation of resources.
3.13.5 Some respondents expressed concern on the patronage of the TMS
Extension as Tuen Mun South was well served by public transportation,
which could provide more direct and point-to-point services. They
suggested that the TMS Extension should further extend to the Hong Kong
International Airport or the Tung Chung Line to increase patronage. Some
professionals and scholars were worried that the TMS Extension might
affect the sustainability of other public transportation currently serving
Tuen Mun South and urged the Government to assess the impact on other
public transport modes.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 37 September 2014
3.13.6 Some professionals suggested that the fares of the West Rail were
relatively high and, with the inclusion of the new extension, they should be
made more affordable in future in order to encourage more patronage and
enhance its competitiveness.
Location of Stations of the TMS Extension
3.13.7 Many members of the public, residents in Tuen Mun and professionals
suggested that, since there was undeveloped land in areas near Tuen
Mun Ferry Pier, Butterfly Estate and Wu King Estate, it was suitable to
extend the West Rail along Tuen Mun River Channel and develop a
station near Tuen Mun Ferry Pier. The location of the station for the TMS
Extension should be close to residential developments and Light Rail
stations. However, some local residents were worried that the TMS
Extension would cause visual impact along Tuen Mun River Channel.
3.13.8 Some members of the public suggested that another station near the Tuen
Mun Swimming Pool should be developed to serve the new residential
developments in the surrounding areas.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 38 September 2014
3.14 Hung Shui Kiu Station (HSK Station)
Fig. 3.9: Preliminary Conceptual Scheme of the HSK Station
3.14.1 The following key consultation points were provided in the PE materials to
facilitate public participation.
Do you agree that the Government should plan the Hung Shui Kiu Station
in tandem with the HSK NDA to satisfy the local transport demand?
Upon completion of the Tai Wai to Hung Hom Section of the Shatin to
Central Link, the West Rail Line will become a part of the East West
Corridor which runs through northwestern New Territories, East Tsim Sha
Tsui, Hung Hom, Kowloon East, Tai Wai, Ma On Shan and Wu Kai Sha.
To avoid congestion from arising along the East West Corridor, do you
agree that the way forward for the Hung Shui Kiu Station should be
decided after the actual usage of the East West Corridor becomes
observable? Why?
In general, under what circumstances would you support the
implementation of the Hung Shui Kiu Station? Why?
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 39 September 2014
Overview
3.14.2 The general public and many professionals agreed that the HSK Station
should be implemented in tandem with the HSK NDA to integrate land use
planning and transport planning. Many suggested that the start of
operation of the HSK Station should tie in with the population intake of the
HSK NDA.
3.14.3 Many professionals and members of the public agreed that if the
population of the HSK NDA was around 60,000 to 100,000 or above, then
the HSK Station would be needed to serve the local transport demand
since the road network and the Light Rail system would be insufficient to
meet the traffic needs of the residents. They also considered that the
addition of the HSK Station on the existing West Rail would not
significantly affect the patronage of the West Rail.
3.14.4 However, some members of the public were worried that the population in
the HSK NDA might not be able to support the station and the marginal
benefit of providing the station would not be able to justify the capital cost.
Some expressed concern that development of the HSK Station and the
HSK NDA would lead to the loss of farmland and ecological impact.
Interfacing with Other Railway Lines and Transportation System
3.14.5 Members of the public suggested that the HSK Station should be well
connected to the existing Light Rail system to provide convenient railway
service to serve the future HSK NDA.
3.14.6 Some professionals recommended that the relationship between the HSK
Station and the WEL should be studied since the WEL would affect the
ridership patterns at Hung Shui Kiu.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 40 September 2014
3.15 Tung Chung West Extension (TCW Extension)
Fig. 3.10: Preliminary Conceptual Scheme of the TCW Extension
3.15.1 The following key consultation points were provided in the PE materials to
facilitate public participation.
Apart from the vicinities of Yat Tung Estate, low-density development
sprawls across most parts of Tung Chung West. Do you think that the
Tung Chung West Extension should tie in with the new town extension
plan to improve the cost-effectiveness of the railway project? Why?
A large number of bus routes are available in Tung Chung West, which
provide feeder service to Tung Chung Station of the Tung Chun Line, and
travel to and from Tsuen Wan, Ho Man Tin, Tsim Sha Tsui, Hung Hom,
Tin Hau, Tseung Kwan O, Tin Shui Wai and Shatin etc. Do you think there
is an imminent need to construct the Tung Chung West Extension if Tung
Chung West is not further developed? Why?
In general, under what circumstances would you support the
implementation of the Tung Chung West Extension? Why?
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 41 September 2014
Overview
3.15.2 Majority of the public agreed that the TCW Extension should tie in with the
new town extension plans to provide convenient traffic connection for
future residents and facilitate new town developments. They also pointed
out that integrating the planning for new town extension and that for the
TCW Extension would make the railway project more cost-effective.
3.15.3 However, some considered that the TCW Extension would not be required
since the new station would be too close to the existing Tung Chung
Station, and the marginal benefit of the extension would not be able to
justify the capital cost. They suggested that enhancing the feeder
services, such as introducing community light rail system within Tung
Chung or free shuttle services to the Tung Chung Line, should be
sufficient to improve the connectivity in Tung Chung West.
3.15.4 Many members of the public and professionals agreed that the TCW
Extension would be beneficial to the existing community in Yat Tung
Estate by providing a more direct railway connection in lieu of the
expensive and inconvenient existing feeder services between Yat Tung
Estate and Tung Chung Station. However, if Tung Chung West was not to
be further developed, then the TCW Extension should not be constructed
since the population in Yat Tung Estate would not be sufficient to support
the railway service.
3.15.5 Some members of the public suggested that the future Tung Chung Line
with the TCW Extension should be more affordable with convenient feeder
services, in order to encourage more patronage and enhance its
attractiveness and competitiveness.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 42 September 2014
Environmental Considerations
3.15.6 Some green groups and members of the public were worried that the TCW
Extension would involve reclamation in Tung Chung West and affect the
ecologically important Tung Chung River and Tung Chung Bay.
3.15.7 Some professionals suggested that the environmental impact of air
pollution generated by other road-based feeder services should be taken
into consideration. If the TCW Extension was not implemented, other
types of electric feeder services should be considered.
3.16 Kwu Tung Station (KTU Station)
Fig. 3.11: Preliminary Conceptual Scheme of the KTU Station
3.16.1 The following key consultation points were provided in the PE materials to
facilitate public participation.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 43 September 2014
Do you agree that the Government should plan the Kwu Tung Station in
tandem with the KTN NDA to satisfy the local transport demand?
Adding an intermediate station along an existing railway line may increase
the overall journey time. In your opinion, what conditions should be
considered when new intermediate stations are added? Why?
In general, under what circumstances would you support the
implementation of the Kwu Tung Station? Why?
Overview
3.16.2 Majority of the public supported the implementation of the KTU Station and
agreed that if the Kwu Tung North New Development Area (KTN NDA)
was to be developed, then the KTU Station should be built to meet the
local transport demand in time. They considered that the cost of
implementing the KTU Station should not be a problem since provisions of
the station were made during the construction of the Lok Ma Chau Spur
Line. Many suggested that the KTU Station should be connected to the
NOL to improve the east-west connectivity of the New Territories.
3.16.3 However, some local residents in Kwu Tung strongly objected to the
development of the KTN NDA and suggested that the KTU Station would
not be required since the existing public transportation in Kwu Tung was
sufficient to meet the current transport needs of local residents. They
were also concerned about the impact on farmlands, fish ponds and
building structures during the construction of the station.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 44 September 2014
Concern on the Capacity of the East Rail
3.16.4 Many member of the public responded that the East Rail Line was already
very full in the morning peak hours. They were concerned that the East Rail
Line could not accommodate the additional passengers from the KTU
Station. They were worried that, if the KTU Station was added and the
capacity of the East Rail Line was decreased due to the operation of the
Shatin to Central Link, passengers might not be able to get on the train at
Sheung Shui and Fanling Stations to travel to the urban area since the
East Rail Line would already be fully occupied by the passengers boarding
at the KTU Station.
3.16.5 They considered that the KTU Station would increase the patronage of the
Lok Ma Chau Spur Line when the KTN NDA was implemented, and
therefore measures should be taken to ensure that the East Rail Line
would be able to cope with the transport needs of the North District.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 45 September 2014
4. CONCLUSION AND WAY FORWARD
4.1.1 With reference to the public views collected at both stages of the PE
exercise, we conducted further assessment on the railway proposals put
forth for public discussion, such that the planning of the major regional
corridors and local enhancement schemes could be optimised in a
coordinated manner.
4.1.2 Suggestions on other railway proposals were also received from the public
during two stages of the PE exercise and are summarised in Appendix III.
Subsequent to the collection of the public views, we conducted further
study on some of these railway proposals and attempted to integrate them
into the existing railway network (with adjustments, additions and deletions
where necessary), with a view to providing our overall recommendations to
the Government in formulating the railway development blueprint for Hong
Kong.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 46 September 2014
Appendix I: Dissemination of Information about the PE Exercise
The following sections summarise the means of dissemination of
information and collection of public views during the PE period.
PE Publication
PE Documents and PE Digests (in both Chinese and English) were
released to the public for them to gain a better understanding of the study
background, preliminary study findings, and conceptual schemes of the
ten proposals. The documents were available at public enquiry service
centres of 18 District Offices of the Home Affairs Department and public
libraries throughout Hong Kong and were also downloadable from the
study website.
Study Website
The study website (www.ourfuturerailway.hk) was officially launched on 20
April 2012. Apart from general background information of the study,
descriptions and illustrations of the conceptual schemes, the website also
featured “Key Consultation Points” of various topics to enhance the
public’s understanding and to gather their views. The public might submit
their views, comments and suggestions on the schemes.
Upon the completion of the Stage 2 PE exercise on 20 May 2013, the
website recorded over 303,000 visits; over 1,200 and 2,950 comments
were received on the website during Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the PE
exercise respectively. Although the Stage 2 PE exercise officially ended
on 20 May 2013, the study website remained available until the completion
of the study.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 47 September 2014
Online Forums
Official government online forums (“Public Affairs Forum”
www.forum.gov.hk) on the topics “Our Future Railway Stage 1 Public
Engagement Exercise” and “Our Future Railway Stage 2 Public
Engagement Exercise” were set up to facilitate public discussion on the
internet. A total of 39 comments were received through this channel.
Apart from the “Public Affairs Forum”, it was noted that the public also
discussed "Our Future Railway" on other online forums and discussion
groups.
Emails, Hotline, Faxes and Written Submissions
To encourage public participation, a hotline (3922 9777) was set up for
registration for the PE activities and general enquiries. The public could
submit their comments via email ([email protected]), fax (3922
9713) and by post to the Railway Development Office of the Highways
Department. The Government also received comments from the public via
general enquiry channels and Integrated Call Centre (ICC).
Publicity
Different publicity initiatives were used to augment the reach and visibility
of the PE exercise. These include posters; newspaper advertisements; TV
and radio Announcements in the Public Interest (APIs); and a series of
roving exhibitions.
Posters
Posters were put up on notice boards at public libraries and public enquiry
service centres with a view to facilitating the participation of the PE
exercise and publicity of the study.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 48 September 2014
Newspaper Advertisements
Newspaper advertisements in Chinese and English were placed to
publicise the PE activities, and to call for participation. Advertisements
were placed on a few local newspapers on 25 April 2012 and 25 February
2013 for Stage 1 PE and Stage 2 of the PE exercise respectively.
TV/Radio APIs
The APIs were broadcast on the radio and television from 7 and 9 May
2012 respectively until 20 July 2012 during the Stage 1 PE period; and
from 22 February 2013 until 19 May 2013 during the Stage 2 PE period.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 49 September 2014
Roving Exhibitions
To increase public awareness of the PE exercise, a series of roving
exhibitions were set up at over 20 different locations, covering both the
urban and the New Territories areas.
Roving exhibitions for Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the PE exercise were held
from 26 April to 22 June 2012 and from 22 February to 20 May 2013
respectively.
Stage 1 PE Date Venue 26 - 28 April 2012 Exhibition Corner, Yuen Long Theatre
2 - 5 May 2012 FJ Podium, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
9 - 12 May 2012 Immigration Tower, Wan Chai 16 - 19 May 2012 Subway of East Tsim Sha Tsui MTR Station 21 - 23 May 2012 Tsuen Wan Government Offices
24 - 27 May 2012 Covered Piazza, G/F, Times Square, Causeway Bay
30 May - 1, 4 June 2012 Mongkok Government Offices
11 - 14 June 2012 North District Government Offices 19 - 22 June 2012 Queensway Government Offices Stage 2 PE Date Venue
22 - 24 Feb 2013 Covered Piazza, G/F, Times Square, Causeway Bay
25 Feb - 1 March 2013 Tuen Mun Government Offices 4 - 8 March 2013 North District Government Offices 11 - 15 March 2013 Cheung Sha Wan Government Offices 18 - 22 March 2013 Queensway Government Offices 25 March - 2 April 2013 North Point Government Offices
4 - 10 April 2013 Subway of East Tsim Sha Tsui MTR Station 12 - 18 April 2013 Tung Chung Municipal Services Building 24 - 30 April 2013 Immigration Tower, Wan Chai 6 - 10 May 2013 Ho Man Tin Government Offices 13 - 20 May 2013 Sha Tin Government Offices
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 50 September 2014
Appendix II: Public Engagement Activities
To facilitate public engagement and enhance interaction, a range of PE
activities were organised during the PE period. They included:
Public Forums
The Public Forums aimed at providing a platform for the Government, the
consultant and the general public to gather and discuss in a
comprehensive and interactive manner. Four Public Forums were
conducted during each stage of the PE exercise, covering both the urban
and New Territories areas.
Public Forums during Stage 1 PE Date Venue 5 May 2012 Lecture Room 2, Tuen Mun Town Hall
21 May 2012 Function Room AC2, Hong Kong Cultural Centre, Tsim Sha Tsui
2 June 2012 Room 502, The Boys & Girls Clubs Association of HK, Wan Chai
19 June 2012 Function Room 2, Tai Po Civic Centre Public Forums during Stage 2 PE Date Venue 16 March 2013 Multi-Purpose Hall, City Gallery, Central
19 March 2013 Function Room AC2, Hong Kong Cultural Centre, Tsim Sha Tsui
20 April 2013 Lecture Room 2, Tuen Mun Town Hall 23 April 2013 Auditorium, North District Town Hall
The forums were moderated by an independent media professional and
conducted in Cantonese. Each forum started with an introduction on the
study background and preliminary study findings, followed by a
presentation on the conceptual schemes proposed in each stage of the PE
exercise. The forum then went into open floor discussion with responses
from Government representatives.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 51 September 2014
Participants at the forums included the general public, students, District
Councillors, professionals, residents from different local communities and
other stakeholders. The eight Public Forums were attended by over 490
participants in total.
Focus Group Meetings
To facilitate in-depth discussion with professionals and academics, two
Focus Group Meetings were conducted during each stage of the PE
exercise. They were conducted on 12 May 2012 and 23 May 2012 during
the Stage 1 PE exercise and on 6 March 2013 and 23 March 2013 during
the Stage 2 PE exercise. Participation was by invitation. A total of 32 and
25 experts with relevant professional and academic background
participated in the Focus Group Meetings held during Stage 1 and Stage 2
of the PE exercise respectively.
Briefings to Statutory and Advisory Bodies/Committees
Briefing sessions were conducted with various statutory and advisory
bodies/committees during the two stages of PE exercise. These included:
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 52 September 2014
Stage 1 PE Stage 2 PE Subcommittee on Matters Relating to Railways, Legislative Council
(LegCo) Transport Advisory Committee
Heung Yee Kuk District Councils (DCs) (upon their invitations)
- Tsuen Wan (Traffic & Transport Committee)
- Southern - Tuen Mun (Traffic & Transport
Committee) - Yau Tsim Mong (Traffic &
Transport Committee) - Islands (Traffic & Transport
Committee) - Eastern (Traffic & Transport
Committee) - North - Yuen Long
- Southern - Islands (Traffic & Transport
Committee) - Kwun Tong (Traffic & Transport
Committee) - Eastern (Traffic & Transport
Committee) - Sham Shui Po (Transport Affairs
Committee) - Central and Western (Traffic &
Transport Committee) - Yuen Long - Tsuen Wan (Traffic & Transport
Committee) - Tai Po (Traffic & Transport
Committee - Tuen Mun (Traffic & Transport
Committee) - North (Traffic & Transport
Committee) - Wan Chai
Briefings to Professional Institutes and Business Sector
Briefing sessions were also conducted with the following bodies from the
professional and business sectors upon their invitations:
Invitations received during the Stage 1 PE exercise:
Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport in Hong Kong (CILTHK)
Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce (HKGCC)
Business and Professionals Federation of Hong Kong (BPFHK)
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 53 September 2014
Invitations received during the Stage 2 PE exercise:
Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport in Hong Kong (CILTHK)
Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce (HKGCC)
Hong Kong Institute of Planners (HKIP), Hong Kong Institute of Urban
Design (HKIUD), Hong Kong Institute of Architects (HKIA) (Joint
invitation)
Architectural, surveying and planning professionals (organised by the
Hon. Tony TSE, Legislative Council Member of Architectural,
Surveying and Planning Functional Constituency)
Briefings to Political Parties on invitation
Briefing sessions were also conducted with the following bodies from the
political parties upon their invitations during the Stage 2 PE exercise:
Invitations received during the PE exercise:
Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong
(DAB)
New People s Party (NPP)
Democratic Party
Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions (HKFTU)
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 54 September 2014
Appendix III
Other Suggestions from the Public on the Ten Proposed Railway Schemes during Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the Public Engagement Exercise
Hon
g K
ong-
Shen
zhen
W
este
rn E
xpre
ss L
ine
(WEL
)
Extension of the WEL 1. Extension of the Domestic Spur Line to different areas, e.g.
Discovery Bay, Sunny Bay and Cheung Chau 2. Provision of the Domestic Spur Line by extending the West Rail
Line from Yuen Long to Ching Chung via Tuen Mun 3. Extension of the Cross-boundary Spur Line to Tin Shui Wai Other Suggestion 4. Tin Shui Wai as the interchanging hub for the Cross-boundary Spur
Line
Nor
ther
n Li
nk
(NO
L)
Extension of the NOL 1. Extension to the NENT, e.g. Liantang, Kwan Tei and Sha Tau Kok
2. Extension to Chau Tau, Lok Ma Chau and Lo Wu
3. Extension to Tuen Mun and Tung Chung
4. Extension to Tai Po Industrial Estate and Science Park via Lau Shui Heung, and further connection to the Shatin to Central Link
5. Extension from Kam Sheung Road to Tai Wai
6. Connection to Yuen Long Station and further extension to Long Ping and Tin Shui Wai
Other Suggestion
7. Provision of stations at Palm Springs and Fairview Park
Tuen
Mun
to T
suen
W
an L
ink
(TM
TWL)
Extension to the TMTWL 1. Extension to Tin King Estate, Tuen Mun Town Centre, Hung Shui
Kiu and Yuen Long Other Suggestion
2. Alternative alignment of the TMTWL via Ma Wan 3. Provision of stations at various locations, e.g. Gold Coast, Tai Lam
and Siu Lam. 4. Provision of a spur line of the TMTWL to Tsing Yi
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 55 September 2014
Nor
th Is
land
Lin
e (N
IL)
Extension of the NIL 1. Extension of the Tseung Kwan O Line in the “Interchange” Scheme
to the southwest areas, e.g. Hong Kong Station, Central South and Pokfulam area with connection to the SIL(W).
2. Extension of the Tung Chung Line in the “Interchange” Scheme to Wan Chai South, Leighton and Happy Valley
Other Suggestion 3. Provision of a station near Fortress Hill on the Tseung Kwan O Line
between North Point and Tin Hau in the “Swap” Scheme 4. Extension of the Tung Chung Line parallel to the Island Line, with
fewer stops for provision of “express rail” service 5. Expansion of the current Island Line by running parallel lines, i.e. two
tracks in each direction 6. Extension of the Airport Express Line and connection to the NIL 7. Deletion of the Tamar Station
Siu
Sai W
an L
ine
(SSW
L) Extension of the SSWL
1. Extension of the SSWL to various locations, such as Cape Collinson, Ngan Wan, Tseung Kwan O, Tung Lung Chau and Shek O / Stanley
2. Extension of the Island Line to Siu Sai Wan and then to the Tsueng Kwan O Line via LOHAS Park to form a loop.
Other Suggestion 3. Bifurcation of the SSWL from Shau Kei Wan instead of Heng Fa
Tsuen
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 56 September 2014
So
uth
Isla
nd L
ine
(Wes
t) (S
IL(W
))
Extension of the SIL(W) 1. Extension of the SIL(W) by linking with the proposed artificial island
near Lamma Island, and further extension to Cheung Chau and Lantau Island
2. Connection of the SIL(W) to the unused platform at Rumsey Street in Sheung Wan, and further extension to Kai Tak and Kowloon East
Other Suggestion 3. Shifting the alignment from Cyberport toward the Chi Fu area 4. Connection of the SIL(W) to Kennedy Town Station instead of Hong
Kong University Station 5. Direct connection from Cyberport to Central 6. Extension of the South Island Line (East) and the Shatin to Central
Link to Aberdeen and Pokfulam areas. 7. Running the alignment of the SIL (W) by tram service to form a loop
along the south shore of the Hong Kong Island
Tuen
Mun
Sou
th
Exte
nsio
n (T
MS)
Extension from Tuen Mun South 1. Extension from Tuen Mun South to the west to River Trade
Terminal or Lung Kwu Tan, and Nim Wan 2. Extension from Tuen Mun South to the south to the Airport or Tung
Chung Other Suggestion 3. Provision of a station near Tuen Mun Swimming Pool 4. Integration of the TMS Extension with the WEL
Hun
g Sh
ui
Kiu
Sta
tion
(HSK
)
1. Provision of a spur line to connect the HSK Station with the WEL.
Tung
Chu
ng
Wes
t Ext
ensi
on
(TC
W)
1. Provision of a community railway, light rail or monorail to connect Tung Chung West, Tung Chung and the Airport.
2. Provision of stations at Tung Chung East and Siu Ho Wan
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 57 September 2014
K
wu
Tung
Sta
tion
(KTU
) 1 Connection from the KTU Station to the Shenzhen Metro 2 Provision of two stations to serve the Kwu Tung North NDA.
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 58 September 2014
Other Suggestions from the Public on New Railway Proposals during Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the Public Engagement Exercise
Oth
er S
ugge
stio
ns o
n N
T Li
nes
from
the
Publ
ic
Provision of railway service to NT North 1. Extension of the Shatin to Central Link to Fanling South, Ping Che,
Ta Kwu Ling and Liantang 2. Extension of the West Rail Line to Tin Shui Wai North Provision of railway service to NT East 3. Extension of the Tseung Kwan O Line from Po Lam to Wu Kai Sha
and Fo Tan via HKUST and Sai Kung 4. Extension of the Tseung Kwan O Line to Tsui Lam and Ma Yau Tong 5. Extension of the Ma On Shan Line from Wu Kai Sha to Tai Po via Ma
Shi Chau 6. Provision of a station at Kam Ying on the Ma On Shan Line 7. Extension of the East Rail Line to Ma Liu Shui and Science Park 8. Provision of a new station at Tai Po Market Station, and between Tai
Wo and Fanling on the East Rail Line Provision of railway service to NT West 9. Provision of a railway between Tsuen Wan, Tsuen Wan West and
Tsing Yi 10. Extension of the Tsuen Wan Line to Discovery Park, Tsuen King
Garden, Belvedere Garden and Hanley Villa 11. Extension of the West Rail Line from Tsuen Wan West to the
industrial areas along Texaco Road 12. Extension or realignment of the West Rail Line to serve Hung Shui
Kiu, Butterfly Beach, Tin King, Leung King, Shan King, and Area 46 / Area 40 of Tuen Mun
13. Extension of the West Rail Line to Sham Tseng 14. Provision of a railway between Shek Yum (Kwai Chung) and Lai King Connection between NT East and NT West 15. Provision of a railway between Tsuen Wan West and Tai Wai via Lai
King, NE Kwai Chung and Lei Muk Shue 16. Provision of a railway between Tsuen Wan or Yuen Long and Tai Po Connection between NT East and West Kowloon 17. Provision of a railway between Mei Foo or West Kowloon and Shatin Provision of railway service to Lantau Island
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 59 September 2014
18. Extension of the Tung Chung Line to the Airport, AsiaWorld-Expo and Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF)
19. Provision of stations at Siu Ho Wan and HKBCF on the Airport Express Line
Provision of railway service to Outlying Islands 20. Provision of a railway between Sunny Bay and Kennedy Town via Hei
Ling Chau, Cheung Chau and Lamma Island 21. Extension of the Shatin to Central Link or the South Island Line (East)
to Lamma Island 22. Extension of the Disneyland Resort Line to Peng Chau 23. Extension of the West Island Line to Ma Wan via Peng Chau,
Discovery Bay and Disneyland Connection between NT West and other areas
24. Extension of the Airport Express Line to Tuen Mun 25. Provision of a railway between Tuen Mun Ferry Pier to Sheung Wan
via Tai Lam, Siu Lam, Disneyland Resort, Cheung Chau and Lamma Island
26. Extension of the West Rail Line to Sai Ying Pun / Shek Tong Tsui Provision of cross-boundary railway service
27. Provision of a railway between Shenzhen Bay and Tin Shui Wai 28. Provision of a railway between Stanley and Man Kam To 29. Provision of a railway between Lok Ma Chau and Shenzhen Futian
station of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL)
30. Provision of a station in New Territories for the XRL 31. Provision of Intercity Through Trains services by the XRL track or
connection of the XRL to Lo Wu Other Suggestions
32. Provision of express railway service along the East Rail Line or connecting districts with a population of over 500,000
33. Provision of the Port Rail Line by making use of the NOL and the East West Corridor
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 60 September 2014
34. Provision of Light Rail systems at/between: - NENT NDAs - Hung Shui Kiu NDA - Tung Chung New Town - Sheung Shui – Fanling – Tai Po - Tai Wai – Shatin – Fo Tan – Ma On Shan - Tsueng Kwan O – Lam Tin – Kwun Tong
Oth
er S
ugge
stio
ns o
n U
rban
Lin
es fr
om th
e Pu
blic
Connection within West / Central Kowloon 1. Provision of a railway between East Tsim Sha Tsui and Lai Chi Kok
via Cultural Centre, Austin Station, Prosperous Garden, Hoi Fu Court, Lai On Estate and Hoi Lai Estate or via Centenary Garden, Pui Ching Road, Parc Oasis, Shek Kip Mei, Pak Tin Estate, Chak On Estate, Lei Cheng Uk and Caritas Medical Centre
2. Provision of a railway between Mong Kok East and Olympic via Mong Kok Station
3. Provision of a railway between Jordan and West Kowloon Cultural District via Austin Station and Kowloon Station
4. Provision of a railway between West Kowloon Terminus and Hong Kong Coliseum via Hong Kong Culture Centre, Hong Kong Space Museum and Hong Kong Science Museum
5. Extension of the East Rail Line to East Tsim Sha Tsui Station Connection within East Kowloon 6. Provision of a railway between Yau Tong Industrial Area and Lok Fu
via Tak Tin, Po Tat, Sau Mau Ping, Anderson Road, Shun Tin, Shun Lee, Choi Wan, Hammer Hill, Tsz Wan Shan, Chuk Yuen and Kowloon Tong
7. Provision of a railway between Yau Tong and To Kwa Wan via Kowloon City, Lok Fu, Tsz Wan Shan, Choi Wan, Shun Lee, and Sau Mau Ping
8. Extension of the Tseung Kwan O Line to serve Sau Mau Ping, Shun Lee, Kai Cheung Road and connection to Kai Tak Station of the Shatin to Central Link
9. Provision of a railway between Diamond Hill and Kwun Tong via Choi Hung, Choi Wan, Shun Lee, Sau Mau Ping, Po Tat, Tak Tin and Lam Tin
10. Provision of a railway between Lam Tin and Tin Ma Court via Sau Mau Ping, Anderson Road, Shun Lee, Choi Wan, Hammer Hill, Tsz Wan Shan and Chuk Yuen
11. Extension of the Kwun Tong Line from Tiu Keng Leng to Hang Hau and Po Lam
Review and Update of the Railway Strategy 2000
Public Engagement Report
Page 61 September 2014
Connection between East and West Kowloon 12. Provision of a railway between Olympic and Kwun Tong via Mong
Kok, Kowloon City, Kai Tak and Kowloon Bay 13. Provision of a railway between Yau Ma Tei and Sam Ka Tsuen via
PolyU, Whampoa, Laguna Verde, Kai Tak and Laguna City or Richland Gardens, Kai Yip Estate, Amoy Gardens, Lok Wah Estate, Hong Ning Road, Yuet Wah Street, Tsui Ping Road, Kai Tin Road, Ping Tin Estate, Kwong Tin Estate, Ko Cheung Court and Lei Yue Mun Village
14. Provision of a railway between Tsz Wan Shan and Lai King 15. Provision of a railway between Nam Cheong and Anderson Road via
Olympic, Mong Kok and Kowloon City Provision of railway service on the Hong Kong Island 16. Provision of an alternative interchange station of the South Island
Line (East) at Causeway Bay or Tin Hau 17. Provision of Wan Chai Station on the South Island Line (East) 18. Extension of the Island Line from Chai Wan to Tai Tam Bay Provision of harbour-crossing railway service 19. Provision of a railway between Olympic and Sheung Wan via Mong
Kok East, Sung Wong Toi, Ma Tau Kok, Kowloon Bay South, Cruise Terminal, Lam Tin, Tai Koo, Tin Hau, Victoria Park, Exhibition, Tamar and Hong Kong Station
20. Extension of the Kwun Tong Line from Lam Tin to Cha Kwo Ling, Quarry Bay, North Point, Fortress Hill, Causeway Bay North, Exhibition, Tamar and Hong Kong Station
21. Extension of the Kwun Tong Line from Whampoa to Fortress Hill 22. Extension of the Kwun Tong Line from Yau Ma Tei to Hung Hom and
North Point to form a loop 23. Extension of the XRL from West Kowloon Terminus to Central and
Tamar 24. Extension of the Shatin to Central Link to Central South or Tamar