Following is a question by the Hon Claudia Mo and a written reply by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, Mr Edward Yau, in the Legislative Council today (May 15):
 
Question:
 
     It has been reported that inbound Mainland tour groups (IMTGs) carrying out activities like shopping and dining in the Kowloon City district have caused serious nuisances to local residents, and that a pedestrian was knocked down and killed in an accident that occurred in To Kwa Wan last month. Regarding IMTGs, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) of the number of traffic accidents involving tourist coaches that occurred in the Kowloon City district in each of the past five years, and the resultant casualties;
 
(2) of the number of law enforcement operations carried out by the Police in the Kowloon City district, in (a) each year and (b) each month of the past five years, against tourist coach drivers who contravened traffic regulations, together with a breakdown by the type of (i) contraventions and (ii) actions taken (e.g. ordering to leave and issuance of fixed penalty notices); the respective locations of the 10 major black spots of the various contraventions;
 
(3) of (i) the number of IMTGs and, among them, (ii) the number of those conducting activities in the Kowloon City district, on average each day in each month of the past five years; whether it has assessed the impacts of such activities on residents in the Kowloon City district;
 
(4) whether it will, targeting at issues concerning contraventions of traffic regulations by tourist coach drivers, raise the relevant penalties and study new measures for traffic improvements; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
 
(5) given that the Government is urging the trade to divert IMTGs joining Victoria Harbour cruises to embark and disembark at piers other than the Kowloon City Ferry Pier, of the progress of the work and the feedback of travel agents, as well as the expected completion time; of the progress so far of the discussions among the Government, operator of the Kai Tak Cruise Terminal (KTCT) and members of the tourism industry on making use of KTCT for diverting tour groups; and
 
(6) whether it will set limits on (i) the number of same-day Mainland visitors, (ii) the number of IMTGs, and (iii) the area of activities of IMTGs, in order to mitigate the impacts of the relevant tourism activities on residents of various districts; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     The Government attaches great importance to the sustainable and healthy development of the tourism industry. Whilst ensuring that the industry brings about benefits to society, we also continuously seek to minimise as far as possible the impact of tourist activities on the local community. The Government has been in close liaison with the travel trade, the Travel Industry Council of Hong Kong (TIC), district personalities and Legislative Council Members in driving the implementation of various targeted mitigation measures to tackle the impact by visitors to Hong Kong on the local community.
 
     In response to the question raised by the Hon Claudia Mo, with relevant bureaux and departments consulted, my reply is as follows:
 
(1) The traffic accident statistics kept by the Transport Department (TD) do not have a breakdown by tourist coaches, so only relevant figures on non-franchised single-deck buses (including tourist coaches) can be provided. During the past five years, the numbers of traffic accidents involving non-franchised single-deck buses that occurred within the area under the Kowloon City District Council's purview and the resultant casualties are set out in Annex 1. 
 
(2) The tourist hotspots in To Kwa Wan and Hung Hom (including areas in the vicinity of To Kwa Wan Road, San Ma Tau Street and Mei King Street, areas around Chi Kiang Street, Sung On Street and Bailey Street, as well as areas near Sze Chuen Street) have been listed by the Police as priority locations for actions against illegal parking. Appropriate enforcement actions are taken in respect of the illegal parking situation of tourist coaches. The Kowloon City Police District deploys staff to carry out crowd management and traffic enforcement actions in such tourist hotspots on a daily basis. 
 
     Between May 2017 and April 2019, the Police issued a total of 4 192 fixed penalty notices to tourist coaches relating to traffic contraventions in the Kowloon City Police District (including To Kwa Wan and Hung Hom districts). The relevant monthly and yearly figures are set out in Annex 2. The Police have not kept any breakdown of the types of contraventions and enforcement actions, as well as information about black spots of the various contraventions and figures of fixed penalty notices before May 2017.
 
(3) At present, TIC is responsible for trade regulation and has issued clear guidelines requiring that travel agents in Hong Kong must, prior to receiving any Mainland inbound tour group, register with TIC and provide information about the tour group in advance. In this regard, TIC reports to the Government on the situation of Mainland inbound tour groups visiting Hong Kong from time to time. It also participates in the inter-departmental meetings convened by the Government before peak periods of visitor arrivals, such that relevant Government departments and attraction operators can better grasp the estimated number of tour groups visiting Hong Kong during the holidays and make corresponding arrangements. The daily average of Mainland inbound tour groups that travel agents registered with TIC in each month during the past five years is set out in Annex 3.
 
(4) In view of the traffic situation in To Kwa Wan and Hung Hom, TD has been endeavouring to identify suitable locations in the two districts for providing additional on-street pick-up/set-down points and parking spaces for use by tourist coaches where road safety is not compromised and traffic conditions permit, as well as granting short-term tenancy (STT) car parks for parking of tourist coaches. Currently, there are a total of 96 on-street metered parking spaces and 110 lay-bys for pick-up or set-down purposes provided by TD in To Kwa Wan and Hung Hom, as well as 73 parking spaces in STT car parks, for use by tourist coaches. TD has also designated "No-stopping Restriction Zones" in suitable road sections in the districts, which limit the pick-up and set-down activities of coaches in restricted hours, so as to maintain smooth traffic flow. Moreover, the Government has offered a discounted fee of $6 per half an hour between 9 am and 8 pm in the temporary car park at the junction of Bailey Street and Sung Ping Street in a bid to encourage parking of tourist coaches at the car park.
 
     As regards traffic enforcement, the Police have been closely monitoring the situation of illegal parking or picking up/setting down passengers by tourist coaches in the above-mentioned districts, taking stern enforcement actions against those which have caused serious obstruction to traffic and posed a safety risk. Starting from January 2019, the Kowloon City Police District has been implementing special traffic control measures around Chi Kiang Street, Sung On Street and Bailey Street, as well as around To Kwa Wan Road, San Ma Tau Street and Mei King Street during daily peak periods of tourist coach movements. Under the control measures, tourist coach drivers have to follow the instructions of the police officers on the spot and drive to designated locations for pick-up and set-down.
 
     To further strengthen the control of the flow of tourist coaches and enhance road safety, the Government plans to establish additional designated passenger pick-up/set-down areas for tourist coaches in the districts. Consideration is being given to using the temporary car park at the junction of Bailey Street and Sung Ping Street as a pick-up/set-down area; providing ten additional on-street metered tourist coach parking spaces at the junction of Hung Hom Road and Bailey Street; and providing four additional lay-bys at appropriate sections of Chi Kiang Street.  To dovetail with these measures, the Government plans to expand the "No-stopping Restriction Zone" for coaches at appropriate road sections on the periphery of tourist hotspots within the districts so as to restrict the pick-up/set-down areas for tourist coaches on public roads, thereby encouraging tourist coaches to use the designated pick-up/set-down areas mentioned above.
 
     Besides, the Police have started to take enforcement actions by means of mobile video recording at tourist hotspots in To Kwa Wan and Hung Hom. They use hand-held video cameras to record instances of traffic contravention on an irregular basis in order to combat obstruction to traffic flow and strengthen the deterrent effect. The Police also plan to launch a pilot scheme on Electronic Fixed Penalty Notices within 2019-20. The frontline law enforcement officers will then be able to access data on vehicles parked illegally via their mobile smart devices and print out fixed penalty notices without delay, with enhanced efficiency in enforcement.
 
     As regards the recent traffic accident involving a tourist coach, the Police are still investigating the case. Subject to the results of the Police’s investigation, TD will review the conditions of the road section concerned and take appropriate follow-up measures.
 
(5) The Government has been liaising with the trade on the feasibility of channelling some harbour cruises to the public landing steps near the Kai Tak Cruise Terminal (KTCT) (namely the Runway Park Pier at Kai Tak), and conducted several site visits to the pier. The trade has indicated that they would consider using the pier and made some suggestions about the enhancement of ancillary facilities. The Government welcomes the trade's positive attitude and looks forward to their early confirmation of the detailed arrangements. The Tourism Commission is actively co-ordinating with the relevant departments with a view to completing the follow-up on pertinent suggestions about the enhancement of ancillary facilities as soon as possible.
 
     Insofar as KTCT is concerned, the cruise terminal is managed by a terminal operator under commercial principles. The ancillary commercial area of KTCT is equipped with catering and other supporting facilities, and all shops have currently been leased out.  The Government is open to the proposal of channelling some inbound tour groups to KTCT and has been co-ordinating with different stakeholders, including arranging for the trade several visits to KTCT and meeting with the terminal operator and shop owners. Nonetheless, the proposal is contingent upon the willingness of the trade and shop owners, and boils down to their commercial decision. Should the trade be interested in using the facilities in KTCT, they are welcome to approach the terminal operator and shop owners for further discussion.
 
(6) The tourist receiving capability of a tourism destination depends on many different factors, including the travel modes of visitors from various source markets, the attractions and facilities of the travel destination, the types of tourism products available in the market, etc.  Furthermore, there is no universally accepted way to set a cap on tourist receiving capability (including numbers of tourists and areas of their activities).  The Government will continue to be proactive in enhancing Hong Kong's various ancillary tourism facilities so as to balance the impact of the tourism industry on the economy and people's livelihood.

     Following is a question by the Hon Jimmy Ng and a written reply by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, Mr Edward Yau, in the Legislative Council today (May 15):
 
Question:
 
     Some members of the manufacturing industry have relayed to me that in recent years, they have planned to upgrade and restructure their plants located in the Mainland cities within the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (the Greater Bay Area), but they have encountered quite a number of difficulties in raising the funds needed.  In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) whether it knows the details of the loans provided by the banks in Hong Kong, in each of the past five years, for Hong Kong-owned manufacturing enterprises in respect of their plants located in the Mainland cities within the Greater Bay Area, including (i) the number of cases, (ii) the number of enterprises, as well as (iii) the total, median and average amounts of loans, together with a tabulated breakdown by the (a) name of bank and (b) city where the plant was located; and 

(2) whether it will introduce more targeted measures to assist such Hong Kong-owned manufacturing enterprises in upgrading and restructuring their plants, as well as seizing the opportunities brought about by the development of the Greater Bay Area; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:
 
President,
 
     In consultation with the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) and the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau, our reply to the various parts of the question is as follows:
 
(1) The HKMA does not have statistics on the loans provided by the banks in Hong Kong for Hong Kong-funded manufacturing enterprises in respect of their plants located in the Mainland cities within the Greater Bay Area.
 
(2) The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) Government has been assisting enterprises in upgrading and restructuring their operations through various means.
 
     The Government launched the Dedicated Fund on Branding, Upgrading and Domestic Sales (BUD Fund) in June 2012 to assist enterprises in enhancing competitiveness and furthering business and brand development in the Mainland. Enterprises can apply for the funding support of BUD Fund to carry out projects to develop brands, upgrade and restructure business operations and promote sales. Allowable project measures may include procuring or leasing of machinery/equipment, producing moulds or samples of new products, etc. Since the launch of the BUD Fund in 2012 and up to the end of March 2019, a total of 1 749 applications were approved under the Mainland Programme of the BUD Fund, involving a total funding amount of about $699.4 million.

     To assist Hong Kong enterprises in capturing the opportunities brought about by the development of the Greater Bay Area, the Government has implemented enhancement measures in August 2018, including doubling the cumulative funding ceiling for each enterprise for undertaking projects in the Mainland from $500,000 to $1 million. Enterprises responded positively to the enhancement measures. Since the implementation of the enhancement measures and up to the end of March 2019, a total of 857 applications were received under the Mainland Programme of the BUD Fund, representing an increase of 100 per cent as compared to the corresponding period in 2017-2018. 318 of those applications have been approved, involving a funding amount of $183.5 million.
 
     In addition, the HKMC Insurance Limited and the Trade and Industry Department have implemented respectively the special concessionary measures under the SME Financing Guarantee Scheme and the SME Loan Guarantee Scheme to assist enterprises in securing loans for acquiring equipment and for general working capital, etc.
 
     At the same time, the Hong Kong SAR Government has launched a series of publicity efforts to increase understanding in the development of the Greater Bay Area amongst various sectors of society. The Hong Kong SAR Government has set up a dedicated website on the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (www.bayarea.gov.hk) and a WeChat official account (WeChat ID: HKCMAB) to provide latest information on the development of the Greater Bay Area, as well as regular updates on policies of Greater Bay Area cities and the work of the Hong Kong SAR Government, with a view to helping enterprises and members of the public understand and take advantage of the development opportunities brought about by the development of the Greater Bay Area.
 
     The Government will continue with the above work, and review the various support measures from time to time in order to provide adequate and timely support to enterprises.

     Following is a question by the Hon Jeremy Tam and a written reply by the Secretary for the Environment, Mr Wong Kam-sing, in the Legislative Council today (May 15):

Question:

     It has been reported that liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) light buses currently produced by a single manufacturer will cease to be produced in 2021. Thereafter, members of the trade who wish to replace their existing light buses may need to purchase diesel ones. Some environmental groups have pointed out that diesel light buses have a higher level of emission of air pollutants (e.g. respirable suspended particulates) than LPG light buses, posing hazards to public health. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) how do the levels of emission of various types of air pollutants (including (i) nitrogen oxides, (ii) respirable suspended particulates, (iii) fine suspended particulates, (iv) hydrocarbons and (v) carbon monoxide) from LPG light buses compare with those from diesel light buses, assuming that both meet the latest emission standards (provide the data on these two types of vehicles obtained respectively in laboratory and from detection on the road by using roadside remote sensing equipment);

(2) of the number of light buses acquired with the subsidy of the Pilot Green Transport Fund (the Fund) since the establishment of the Fund in 2011, and the following information in respect of each of the light buses: (i) the type of energy used, (ii) model, (iii) price, (iv) the amount of subsidy, (v) the route serviced, (vi) the name of operator, (vii) performance (including the time a light bus can travel after a full charge, horsepower and average fuel economy), and (viii) the levels of emissions of various types of air pollutants;

(3) whether it has studied if the light buses mentioned in (2) are better than diesel and LPG light buses in terms of performance and reduction of pollutant emissions; if it has studied and the outcome is in the affirmative, whether the Government will raise the amount of subsidies provided under the Fund to encourage the trade to acquire light buses fuelled by those types of energy; and

(4) as it has been reported that the land leases of the 12 dedicated LPG filling station sites in Hong Kong will expire between 2021 and 2022, whether the Government has plans, in granting renewal of the land leases concerned, to add a provision requiring the lessees to provide charging equipment for electric light buses at the stations?

Reply:

President,

     The Government launched a scheme in 2002 to encourage owners of diesel light buses to switch to light buses running on cleaner power/fuels like liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and electricity. The scheme on an encouraged basis ended in 2005. As the Government has not mandated the type of power/fuels used by light buses, light bus owners may, based on their operational needs, choose LPG, diesel, electric or petrol vehicles. As at the end of 2018, nearly 60 per cent of registered light buses were fuelled by LPG, the remaining 40 per cent by diesel, and less than 1 per cent electric.

     At present, the LPG light buses in the local market come from the same brand. The supplier indicated earlier that its manufacturer will cease the production of LPG light buses by the end of 2020, and the Euro VI diesel light buses under the same brand will be supplied by then to meet the local demand for light buses. Owing to technology advancement in emission reduction in recent years, Euro VI diesel light buses emit 80 per cent less nitrogen oxides (NOx) and 50 per cent less respirable suspended particulates (RSP) than their Euro V diesel counterparts and nearly 90 per cent less NOx and 50 per cent less RSP than their Euro IV diesel counterparts.

     My specific responses to the question raised by the Hon Jeremy Tam are as follows:

(1) For light buses of design weight more than 3.5 tonnes that have obtained exhaust emission type approval from the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) certifying their compliance with Euro V standards (or equivalent) or Euro VI standards, their laboratory-tested exhaust emission values are tabulated at Annex 1.

     Annex 1 shows that advancement in emission reduction technology for Euro VI diesel light buses has largely reduced their NOx and RSP emissions as compared with their Euro V diesel counterparts and even more so as compared with their old Euro IV diesel counterparts. Annex 1 also reveals a significant reduction in the gap between Euro VI diesel light buses and existing LPG light buses in terms of NOx emissions while the emissions from LPG light buses which have been used for years will increase with time. Therefore, when the existing old light buses switch to Euro VI diesel light buses in the future, their overall emission performance will not deteriorate.

     Regarding roadside remote sensing equipment, the existing technology is used for monitoring in-use petrol or LPG vehicles that have excessive exhaust emissions but it is not yet applicable to diesel vehicles. Owing to the differences in road conditions, the emission data collected from general vehicles running on road is also technically not suitable for comparison with pollutant emissions collected from laboratory testing (note).

(2) & (3) Currently, there are only two electric light bus models and one hybrid light bus model available in the local market. All have been/are on trial under the Pilot Green Transport Fund (PGTF) and their details are set out at Annex 2.

     To avoid hindering approved applicants from receiving competitive tenders, we do not disclose the product price and subsidy amount for individually approved case.

Electric Light Buses

     Electric light buses (e-LBs) have no tailpipe emissions. Results of existing trials have reflected that high production cost, limited service life and long charging time of batteries, hilly terrain in Hong Kong and the need to provide long hours of air-conditioning during driving in summer, etc. are the key constraints for electric commercial vehicles (e-CVs), including e-LBs, to become popular as the aforesaid factors reduce the driving range of e-CVs batteries. Although the fuel cost of e-LBs on trial under the PGTF is about 70 per cent lower than that of diesel light buses, e-LBs, after a full charge taking four hours, still has a driving range lower than the daily mileage of a typical public light bus (PLB). Therefore, most of the existing e-LBs on trial are yet to be able to cope with the requirements of the local transport sector in respect of requirements on the driving range and charging time of PLBs. 

     In this connection, the EPD has engaged a consultant to develop a set of technical specifications and requirements of electric public light buses (e-PLB) and its charging facilities suitable for use in Hong Kong in order to help promote suppliers to design and manufacture suitable e-PLBs and charging facilities for local use.

Hybrid Light Buses

     Hybrid vehicles could operate without charging their batteries by an external power source and their operation is similar to that of general conventional vehicles. Higher fuel economy is the merit of hybrid vehicles over their conventional counterparts, thereby reducing operating cost and air pollutant emissions. However, the actual fuel economy of a hybrid vehicle depends on the route in operation. A route requiring frequent start-stop will harness better the hybrid drive-train. If a route is dominated by highway driving, a hybrid vehicle may not outperform its conventional counterpart in fuel economy.

     Under the PGTF, five diesel-electric hybrid light buses of the same model (i.e. EQ6700L5SHEVY) have been on trial by applicants who also use conventional diesel light buses. The trial results showed that these hybrid light buses incurred a fuel cost saving of no more than 4 per cent compared to conventional diesel light buses. The lower than anticipated fuel economy of these hybrid light buses might be due to inadequate cooling for their batteries. The manufacturer of this hybrid light bus model has launched a new model of diesel-electric hybrid light buses (i.e. GM6700GAREEV) to replace the old model, and they are on trial under the PGTF by applicants who also use conventional LPG light buses.  An independent third party consultant has been engaged by the EPD to assess the trial data of the new model and the results of the trial will be announced upon completion of the assessment.

     As regards the NOx and RSP emission levels of hybrid light buses, their laboratory-tested exhaust emission values are comparable to those of Euro V diesel light buses.

     In addition, The Chief Executive's 2018 Policy Address has announced that the PGTF will be subject to review. The Government is conducting the review and aims to complete it in 2019. After drawing up relevant proposals, the Government will consult the transport sectors, stakeholders, the Advisory Council on the Environment and the Panel on Environmental Affairs of the Legislative Council.

(4) The Design, Build and Operate (DBO) contracts of the 12 dedicated LPG filling stations will expire successively between 2021 and 2022. Prior to the expiry of these DBO contracts, the Government will examine the future arrangements for the dedicated LPG filling stations and, in parallel, consider land uses that will dovetail with the development of new energy vehicles.

Note: For laboratory-based tests, vehicle engines are run under specified conditions for tens of minutes during which their average pollutant emissions are measured. For roadside remote sensing equipment, measurements are made within just a few seconds when vehicles pass by the equipment to identify those with excessive exhaust emissions. Thus, the data collected by the two methods should not be directly compared.

     Special traffic arrangements will be implemented in Happy Valley today (May 15). The arrangements will come into effect one and a half hours before the start of the first race and will last until the crowds have dispersed after the race meeting.

A. Traffic arrangements before the commencement of the first race

1. Road closure

     Southbound Wong Nai Chung Road between Queen's Road East and the up-ramp outside Hong Kong Jockey Club (HKJC) will be closed except for vehicles heading for Aberdeen Tunnel.

2. Traffic diversions

– Southbound Wong Nai Chung Road between Village Road and the up-ramp outside HKJC will be re-routed one way northbound;
– Vehicles from eastbound Queen's Road East heading for Wan Chai and Happy Valley will be diverted to turn left to Morrison Hill Road;
– Traffic along southbound Morrison Hill Road heading for Happy Valley will be diverted via Sports Road and Wong Nai Chung Road;
– Traffic along Queen's Road East cannot turn right to Wong Nai Chung Road except for vehicles heading to Aberdeen Tunnel;
– Traffic from Cross Harbour Tunnel heading for Queen's Road East will be diverted via the down-ramp leading from southbound Canal Road flyover to Morrison Hill Road to turn right at the junction of Wong Nai Chung Road and Queen's Road East; and
– Traffic from Cross Harbour Tunnel heading for Happy Valley or Racecourse will be diverted via the down-ramp leading from southbound Canal Road flyover to Canal Road East, southbound Morrison Hill Road, Sports Road and Wong Nai Chung Road.

B. Traffic arrangements before the conclusion of race meeting

1. Road closure

     The following roads will be closed from 35 minutes before the start of the last race:

– The up-ramp on Wong Nai Chung Road outside HKJC leading to Aberdeen Tunnel;
– Southbound Wong Nai Chung Road between Queen's Road East and the up-ramp leading to Aberdeen Tunnel;
– Southbound Wong Nai Chung Road between Village Road and the Public Stands of HKJC;
– Westbound Leighton Road between Wong Nai Chung Road and Canal Road East; and
– Southbound Morrison Hill Road between Leighton Road and Queen's Road East.
     
     In addition, southbound Wong Nai Chung Road between the up-ramp leading to Aberdeen Tunnel and the Public Stands of HKJC will be closed from about 10 minutes before the start of the last race.

2. Traffic diversions

     The following traffic arrangements will be implemented from 35 minutes before the start of the last race:

– Eastbound Queen's Road East at its junction with Morrison Hill Road will be reduced to one-lane traffic heading for northbound Canal Road flyover;
– Vehicles from Cross Harbour Tunnel heading for Wan Chai will be diverted via the down-ramp leading from Canal Road East, U-turn slip road beneath Canal Road flyover, Canal Road West and Hennessy Road;
– Vehicles from Cross Harbour Tunnel heading for Happy Valley will be diverted via the down-ramp leading from Canal Road East, eastbound Leighton Road and Wong Nai Chung Road;
– Traffic on southbound Morrison Hill Road will be diverted to turn left to eastbound Leighton Road;
– Traffic along southbound Morrison Hill Road heading for Happy Valley will be diverted via eastbound Leighton Road and Wong Nai Chung Road; and
– Traffic along westbound Leighton Road will be diverted to Wong Nai Chung Road.

C. Learner drivers prohibition

     Learner drivers will be prohibited to turn left from Caroline Hill Road to Leighton Road between one and a half hours before the start of the first race and one hour after the last race. In addition, learner drivers will be prohibited from accessing the following roads within the above period of time:

– Shan Kwong Road between Yik Yam Street and Wong Nai Chung Road;
– Village Road between its upper and lower junctions with Shan Kwong Road;
– Percival Street between Hennessy Road and Leighton Road;
– Canal Road East; and
– The service road leading from Gloucester Road to Canal Road flyover.

D. Suspension of parking spaces

     Parking spaces on southbound Wong Nai Chung Road between Sports Road and Blue Pool Road will be suspended from 11am to 7pm during day racing, from 4.30pm to 11.59pm during evening racing, and from 5pm to 11.59pm during night racing.

     Any vehicles found illegally parked within the precincts of the above affected areas will be towed away without prior notice.

     Actual implementation of road closure and traffic diversion will be made by the Police at the time depending on traffic conditions in the areas. Motorists should exercise tolerance and patience, and follow the instructions of Police on site.

     Following is a question by the Hon Holden Chow and a written reply by the Secretary for the Environment, Mr Wong Kam-sing, in the Legislative Council today (May 15):

Question:

     Quite a number of Tung Chung residents have relayed to me that there are often heavy vehicles travelling at a high speed on the North Lantau Highway (which has a speed limit of 110 kilometres per hour), causing serious noise nuisance to them. They therefore request the Government to retrofit noise barriers at the relevant road section. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the respective names of the expressways in the territory which have currently (i) been installed with and (ii) not been installed with noise barriers, and set out in a table by name of expressway of the road sections which (iii) have been installed with noise barriers and (iv) will be retrofitted with noise barriers in the coming three years;

(2) whether it regularly measured, in the past three years, the traffic noise levels at the Tung Chung section of the North Lantau Highway; if so, of the approach adopted for the measurement, and the traffic noise levels recorded at different hours; and

(3) whether it will consider retrofitting noise barriers at the Tung Chung section of the North Lantau Highway or taking other measures, so as to alleviate the traffic noise nuisance caused to Tung Chung residents; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

     The Government is committed to mitigating traffic noise impact on members of the public through various means. They include (i) requiring carrying out of noise impact assessments to reduce potential noise problems when planning new developments (such as roads and residential developments); (ii) regulating by law the noise emission levels of vehicles for first registration; and (iii) where practicable and subject to resource availability, resurfacing with low-noise materials and/or retrofitting noise barriers/enclosures on existing roads generating excessive traffic noise.

     My reply to the question raised by the Hon Holden Chow is as follows:

(1) (i) Names of expressways which have been installed with noise barriers:
 

(ii) Names of expressways which have not been installed with noise barriers:
 

(iii) Sections of expressways which have been installed with noise barriers:
 

(iv) Regarding traffic noise impact of existing roads on neighbouring residents, it is the Government's policy, where practicable and subject to availability of resources, to study the implementation of direct noise mitigation measures on existing roads generating traffic noise at neighbouring residents at levels exceeding 70 dB(A)(note). Such measures include retrofitting of noise barriers/enclosures, and road resurfacing with low noise materials. Following this policy, the noise barrier retrofitting projects on three existing roads (not expressways) are under construction. For other noise barrier retrofitting projects on expressways, they are currently still in planning stage.

Note: Road traffic noise level is specified in terms of L10 (one hour) which is the noise level exceeded for 10 per cent of a one-hour period and is generally measured at peak traffic flow. The traffic noise limit of 70 dB(A) for residential premises as stipulated in the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines is adopted as the criterion for studying the implementation of noise mitigation measures under existing policy.

(2) When planning the North Lantau Highway and the residential developments in Tung Chung New Town, the Government and developers have based on the maximum projected traffic flow within 15 years after development commencement to assess the traffic noise levels of the North Lantau Highway at nearby residential units and, in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines, have proposed appropriate measures to mitigate traffic noise impacts. Therefore, there is no need to conduct regular measurements of traffic noise levels at the Tung Chung section of the North Lantau Highway.
 
     To let the public know about the traffic noise situations of roads in various districts over the territory (including the North Lantau Highway), the Environmental Protection Department has based on the statistical traffic data published by the Transport Department to estimate the traffic noise regularly. The spatial distributions have been uploaded to the website of the Environmental Protection Department for public reference. As the relevant road traffic noise levels were assessed based on the yearly averaged statistical traffic data, they could better reflect the overall situations than the traffic noise levels measured over certain periods of time.

(3) As mentioned above, the Government, when planning the Tung Chung New Town, has followed the requirements of the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines and the above principles to propose appropriate measures to mitigate traffic noise impacts. Apart from placing noise tolerant uses (such as shopping malls and parks) in between the residential developments (such as the current Coastal Skyline, Caribbean Coast and Seaview Crescent) and the North Lantau Highway in order to increase the buffer distances as far as possible, thereby reducing the potential traffic noise impacts on residential developments, the Government also proposed to pave the North Lantau Highway with low-noise material and to construct noise barriers along the road sections in front of the current Coastal Skyline and Caribbean Coast to reduce traffic noise impacts on these two residential developments. Furthermore, in planning for the residential developments in the Tung Chung New Town, the developers have assessed the traffic noise levels at the residential units and adopted practicable designs and measures to further mitigate the traffic noise impacts, and properly address the traffic noise problems in accordance with the requirements of the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines. Since the traffic noise mitigation measures proposed at the planning stages have been progressively implemented, there is no need to retrofit additional noise barriers or enclosures on the above road sections.