1

(Confirmed minutes) (Translation)

Sai Kung District Council District Facilities Management Committee

Minutes of the Second Meeting in 2020 __________________________________________________________________________ Date: 10 March 2020 (Tuesday) Time: 9:30 a.m. Venue: Conference Room of the Sai Kung District Council Present From To Mr LAI Ming-chak (Chairman) 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr YIP Brandon Kenneth (Vice-Chairman) 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Ms CHAN Ka-lam, Debby 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr CHAN Wai-lit 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr CHAN Yiu-chor, Andrew 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr CHAU Yin-ming, Francis, BBS, MH 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr CHENG Chung-man 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr CHEUNG Chin-pang, Edwin 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr CHEUNG Mei-hung, Chris 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr CHEUNG Wai-chiu 9:50 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr CHOI Ming-hei 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr CHUN Hoi-shing 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr CHUNG Kam-lun 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr FAN Kwok-wai, Gary 9:35 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr FUNG Kwan-on 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr HO Wai-hong, Stanley 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr LAI Wai-tong 11:44 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr LAM Siu-chung, Frankie 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr LAU Kai-hong 9:30 a.m. 12:25 p.m. Mr LEE Yin-ho, Ryan 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Ms LEUNG Hin-yan 9:40 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr LEUNG Li 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr LUI Man-kwong 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr LUK Ping-choi 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr OR Yiu-lam, Ricky 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr TSE Ching-fung 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Ms WONG Cheuk-nga, Valerie 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Mr WONG Shui-sang 9:30 a.m. 11:58 p.m. Mr YU Tsun-ning 9:30 a.m. 12:45 p.m. Miss SIU Joy-lin, Serena (Secretary) Executive Officer (District Council)5, Sai

Kung District Office In Attendance Mr CHOW Tat-wing, Cyrus Assistant District Officer (Sai Kung)1, Sai Kung

District Office Miss WONG Ching-hang, Joey Assistant District Officer (Sai Kung)2, Sai Kung

District Office Miss YIP Wing-sze, Felicia Senior Executive Officer (District Management), Sai

Kung District Office

2

Miss LAU Tang, Moira Senior Executive Officer (District Council), Sai Kung District Office

Mr LIU Chung-him, Michael Executive Officer I (District Council), Sai Kung District Office

Mr CHENG Chi-wing, Ken Senior Liaison Officer (1), Sai Kung District Office Ms LAM Yee-mang, Dawn Senior Liaison Officer (2), Sai Kung District Office Mr WU Wai-kwong, Wilson Senior Liaison Officer (3), Sai Kung District Office Mr CHAN Yau-fong Senior Inspector of Works (Sai Kung), Sai Kung

District Office Mr LAU Wai-choi Inspector of Works (Sai Kung), Sai Kung District

Office Mr CHUNG Yiu-cheong, Rayson Inspector of Works (Hang Hau), Sai Kung District

Office Ms HEUNG Ching-yee, Alice Chief Leisure Manager (New Territories East), Leisure

and Cultural Services Department Ms KONG Po-yee, Alice District Leisure Manager (Sai Kung), Leisure and

Cultural Services Department Ms CHEUNG Nga-yan, Amy Deputy District Leisure Manager (District Support)

Sai Kung, Leisure and Cultural Services Department Mr YU Chun, Calvin Senior Executive Officer (Planning)22, Leisure and

Cultural Services Department Ms LEE Yuk-ping Senior Land Executive/Acquisition, District Lands

Office, Sai Kung Mr LEE Wang-yui, Eddie Architect (Works) 7, Home Affairs Department

Welcome Remarks The Chairman welcomed all Members and representatives of government departments to the second meeting of the Sai Kung District Council (SKDC) District Facilities Management Committee (DFMC) in 2020, in particular the representatives who attended the DFMC meeting for the first time, namely Mr Ken CHENG, Senior Liaison Officer (1), Sai Kung District Office (SKDO), who took over Miss MAK Wai-man, Sandy, on transfer; Mr CHAN Yau-fong, Senior Inspector of Works (Sai Kung), SKDO, who took over Mr YAU Chun-fai on retirement; Ms Amy CHEUNG, Deputy District Leisure Manager (District Support) Sai Kung, Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD), who took over Ms TANG Yim-ha on resignation; and Ms LEE Yuk-ping, Senior Land Executive/Acquisition, District Lands Office, Sai Kung (DLO/SK), who took over Mr KWAN Wa-kit on transfer. On behalf of DFMC, he thanked the representatives from government departments on transfer, resignation or retirement for their contributions to the district over the past years. I. Confirmation of Minutes of the 1st District Facilities Management Committee

(DFMC) Meeting held on 16 January 2020 3. The Chairman said the Secretariat had not received any proposed amendment before the meeting. There being no proposed amendment, the Chairman declared that the minutes of the above meeting were confirmed. II. New Items (A) Working Groups under DFMC

3

(SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 2/20) 4. Members noted the above paper. 5. The Chairman said the paper had set out the working groups established under the previous-term DFMC by the end of its term and their nature and terms of reference. To save time, DFMC had combined its District Facilities Management and Community Involvement Working Group and District Works Working Group (DWWG) in the previous term, and matters concerning district facilities management and community involvement activities had been discussed at the DWWG meetings. As matters concerning community involvement activities would be discussed by other committees in the current term, it was proposed to rename DWWG as the District Works and Facilities Management Working Group (DWFMWG). 6. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that the establishment of the standing DWFMWG and the proposed terms of reference as set out in the paper were endorsed. 7. The Chairman said the Covered Walkway Working Group (CWWG) had been established under DFMC in the previous term, which had not frequently held meetings pending survey findings on pedestrian flow. Since the findings of the survey on pedestrian flow was available at present, it was proposed to continue to establish CWWG of a non-standing nature for the time being. 8. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that the establishment of the non-standing CWWG and the terms of reference as set out in the paper were endorsed. 9. The Chairman continued that DFMC unanimously agreed to cease accepting new works proposals on walkway cover in the previous term due to resource constraint. However, having regard to the newly elected Members in the current term, Members were allowed to submit new works proposals on walkway cover for the Secretariat’s record, but DFMC might not be able to follow them up within a short time. He also noticed that there was an agenda item concerning a new walkway cover proposal. After all the works proposals submitted in the past had been dealt with by DFMC or CWWG, the new works proposals of the current term would be followed up subject to the availability of resources. Besides, currently some walkway cover proposals pending follow-up work had been submitted a few terms ago, the actual situation related to some of them might have changed or new Members of the constituencies concerned might have different views. He therefore proposed that CWWG should convene meetings to deal with the related matters as early as possible. 10. The Chairman said the Secretariat would invite Members to join the working groups by email after the meeting. The membership lists of the working groups would be endorsed by DFMC at its next meeting. 11. Mr CHUNG Kam-lun suggested that the membership lists be endorsed by circulation of papers to expeditiously take forward the projects that could not be followed up during the suspension of operation of the District Councils (DCs). 12. The Chairman said the Secretariat would invite Members to endorse the membership lists of the working groups by circulation of papers. To expeditiously convene meetings to follow up the projects, he proposed to elect at the meeting the Convenors and Vice-Convenors

4

of both working groups and follow the previous practice for election. In other words, the election of each working group should be conducted by a show of hands. Nomination of candidates for the office of the Convenor and Vice-Convenor should be made by a Member, and each nomination should be seconded by another Member. Then, the Convenor and Vice-Convenor of each working group would be elected by Members by a show of hands, and the candidate who obtained a simple majority vote would be elected. 13. The Chairman announced the election of the Convenor of DWFMWG and invited Members to make nominations. 14. Mr LEUNG Li nominated the Chairman as the Convenor of DWFMWG. The nomination was seconded by Messrs LUI Man-kwong and Frankie LAM. 15. The Chairman accepted the nomination. 16. There being only one nomination, the Chairman declared that he himself was elected uncontested as the Convenor of DWFMWG. 17. The Chairman announced the election of the Vice-Convenor of DWFMWG and invited Members to make nominations. 18. Mr CHAN Wai-lit nominated Mr Brandon YIP as the Vice-Convenor of DWFMWG. The nomination was seconded by Messrs LEUNG Li, Frankie LAM and YU Tsun-ning. 19. Mr Brandon YIP accepted the nomination. 20. There being only one nomination, the Chairman declared that Mr Brandon YIP was elected uncontested as the Vice-Convenor of DWFMWG. 21. The Chairman announced the election of the Convenor of CWWG and invited Members to make nominations. 22. Mr LUI Man-kwong nominated the Chairman as the Convenor of CWWG. The nomination was seconded by Mr CHUN Hoi-shing. 23. The Chairman accepted the nomination. 24. There being only one nomination, the Chairman declared that he himself was elected uncontested as the Convenor of CWWG. 25. The Chairman announced the election of the Vice-Convenor of CWWG and invited Members to make nominations. 26. Mr CHAN Wai-lit nominated Mr Brandon YIP as the Vice-Convenor of CWWG. The nomination was seconded by Mr YU Tsun-ning. 27. Mr Brandon YIP accepted the nomination. 28. There being only one nomination, the Chairman declared that Mr Brandon YIP was elected uncontested as the Vice-Convenor of CWWG.

5

29. The Chairman proposed that the tenure of the standing working group should be two years, starting from today until 31 December 2021, whereas that of the non-standing working group should be eight months, starting from today until 9 November 2020. If the non-standing working group had not yet resolved the related matters before the expiry of the tenure, DFMC might extend the tenure of the non-standing working group. 30. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman announced the endorsement of the above arrangement. 31. The Chairman continued that the DWWG meetings in the previous term were normally held between two DFMC meetings. Following the past practice, the Secretary would prepare a meeting schedule of DWFMWG. In order to convene meetings as soon as possible, the meeting schedule would be circulated for DFMC’s endorsement. On the meeting schedule of CWWG, he hoped that the first meeting would be held expeditiously provided that the findings of the survey on pedestrian flow had been obtained. (B) Application from ethnic minorities to use the assembly hall and the conference room of

Kin Choi Community Hall (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 3/20)

32. Miss Felicia YIP, Senior Executive Officer (District Management), SKDO, introduced the paper. 33. Ms LEUNG Hin-yan enquired whether the two ethnic minority (EM) groups concerned had all along been using the Conference Room in Kin Choi Community Hall, and whether they needed a place for regular meetings. She was also concerned about whether it would be unfair to other users since the EM groups would use the community hall at least an hour a day. 34. Mr CHAN Wai-lit enquired the number of participants from the two EM groups who used Kin Choi Community Hall. 35. Miss Felicia YIP of SKDO said the two EM groups had started to use Kin Choi Community Hall since 2009 and had started to organise festive activities in the Community Hall since 2014. As the two EM groups did not have dedicated venues of their own at present, they needed to use the Community Hall for organising classes for studying religious scripture, prayer assemblies or festive activities, etc. She would provide the information on the number of participants from the EM groups who used Kin Choi Community Hall for DFMC’s reference after the meeting. 36. The Chairman said DFMC had always endorsed the applications from EM groups for using Kin Choi Community Hall. Besides, EM groups had attended a meeting of the District Facilities Management and Community Involvement Working Group of the previous term, introducing their usage of the related facilities. The Chairman suggested the Secretariat invite EM groups to attend the DWFMWG meetings for enhanced mutual exchanges and understanding. 37. Mr LUK Ping-choi indicated that EM groups had long been using the venues under SKDO for organising religious activities. Some members of the public had complained that EMs had organised religious activities in public places in Tiu Keng Leng years ago. After the

6

EM groups had started holding religious activities in the Multi-purpose Hall and Conference Room, there had been almost no objection from the community, and EM groups were also willing to use the related facilities at a fixed venue and time. Since the arrangement helped achieve social inclusion, it had been adopted since then. 38. Ms LEUNG Hin-yan welcomed EM groups to use community facilities. SKDC should consider helping them identify long-term meeting places if they needed a fixed venue for organising activities. 39. Ms Debby CHAN stated that there were fewer facilities available for EM groups to organise religious activities, and such facilities were not provided in every district. Since EM groups needed to use the facilities concerned in a long-term and regular manner on religious grounds, she thought that it was inconvenient for them to submit applications to SKDC each time. SKDC should identify venues for long-term use by EM groups to facilitate social inclusion. 40. The Chairman said it was necessary to understand the actual needs of EM groups if social inclusion was to be achieved. Making reference to the practice of DFMC in the previous term, the Chairman requested the Secretariat to invite the EM groups concerned to attend the meetings for understanding the problems encountered by them, including whether they needed to use other community halls or desired to have a dedicated venue for permanent use. After taking note of their views, SKDC would further handle the matter. 41. The Chairman endorsed the applications from EM groups in the district for hiring the facilities in Kin Choi Community Hall. [Post-meeting note of SKDO: Generally speaking, there were about 20 participants attending each routine activity organised by the EM groups while the number of participants attending large-scale festive activities exceeded 100.] [Post-meeting note of the Secretariat: The Secretariat had invited the EM groups to attend the meetings, and the EM groups concerned had replied that they would attend the meetings after the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) situation subsided.] (C) Improvement works on recreation and sports facilities under the Leisure and Cultural

Services Department (LCSD) in 2020-21 (Phase I) (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 4/20)

42. Ms Alice KONG, District Leisure Manager (Sai Kung), LCSD, introduced the paper. 43. Ms Debby CHAN enquired about the details of the removal of existing plants with stunted growth as stated in the paper concerning the Beautification Works for the Parks and Green Belts in Sai Kung and Tseung Kwan O, as well as the reasons why roadside plants were frequently replaced. She thought that beautification works would often turn an existing green area into a scrubland with stunted plants. The funding allocated to beautification and greening works should not be limited to use for plant replacement. She also enquired whether the project would include tree pruning because residents were worried that collapse of trees would recur during the wet season. She suggested that LCSD should collaborate with the Tree Management Office (TMO) or other departments concerned to discuss the suitable plant species, period of planting and frequency of replacement. She also requested LCSD to

7

provide a list of the green areas in Sai Kung and Tseung Kwan O. 44. Mr FUNG Kwan-on indicated that the scope of the Beautification Works for the Parks and Green Belts in Sai Kung and Tseung Kwan O covered Tong Chun Street, where there were fewer trees and plants, but the project did not encompass Po Lam Sitting-out Area, which was larger in size with a greater number of sizeable plants and trees cultivated therein. He enquired whether LCSD would consider including Po Lam Sitting-out Area in the project or whether it would arrange other greening works for the sitting-out area. 45. Mr Ricky OR stated that the paper concerning the Improvement Work at the Cycling Area in Hong Kong Velodrome Park only provided the project estimates, project outline and a diagram showing the scope of works. He asked LCSD whether or not detailed information on the project was available. If the proposal and breakdown of project costs had been prepared, they should be set out in the paper for DFMC’s reference. 46. Ms LEUNG Hin-yan said unsuitable species of trees were frequently planted in Sai Kung. For example, palm trees were planted at locations with heavy pedestrian flow, and trees with thick trunk had been planted in small flower beds, which had to be removed in the end. She recommended that LCSD and other departments establish an inter-departmental working group on the Beautification Works for the Parks and Green Belts in Sai Kung and Tseung Kwan O and consult experts for advice on species suitable for planting at different locations, lest arrangements for refurbishment and replanting be made every year. Regarding the Improvement Work at the Cycling Area in Hong Kong Velodrome Park, she enquired about the design intent of the Cycling Area. In her opinion, if the facility was originally designed for beginner cyclists, skid-resistant floor tiles for pedestrians should not have been paved. 47. Mr CHUN Hoi-shing indicated that roots of trees in roadside planters in the district often grew vigorously and even uplifted the pavement, such as that along the section of Po Fung Road near Tung Wah Group of Hospitals Lui Yun Choy Memorial College and Po Lam Estate, thereby causing pedestrians to trip over easily. He considered it a problem of design and planting arrangement, suggesting that LCSD should accord priority to addressing more pressing problems like this. 48. Mr CHUNG Kam-lun indicated that the Hong Kong Velodrome Park had been criticised for forbidding visitors to cycle at the velodrome when it had first commenced operation. Owing to DFMC’s strenuous efforts, the Cycling Area could finally be provided at the open space between Tseung Kwan O Sports Ground and the Hong Kong Velodrome Park, i.e. the location as shown in the paper, for use by beginner cyclists or young children. Balance bike was an emerging sports item in recent years, but in Sai Kung district, only Tseung Kwan O Waterfront Park was made available for balance bike activity. Parents had reflected the inadequacy of balance bike venues in the district, and hoped that other venues would be available, including the Hong Kong Velodrome Park. As the Hong Kong Velodrome Park was currently not a safe venue for toddlers, he, together with the Chairman of DFMC and other Members, had jointly taken forward the project in the previous term. He continued to support the implementation of the project at present, but agreed that the issues raised by other Members should be examined in detail. 49. Ms Alice KONG of LCSD responded as follows:

The information on the parks and green areas in Sai Kung and Tseung Kwan O where beautification works were being implemented had been included in the paper

8

for Members’ information and endorsement. The funds under application would mainly be used for planting shrubs for landscaping the locations, and tree planting was outside the scope of the funding application. Besides, LCSD had all along been following TMO’s guidelines by planting the suggested tree species at suitable locations. The project mainly involved the removal of dead shrubs identified during routine treatment of plants and the planting of new ones as replacement, thereby beautifying the environment. Regarding uplifting of pavement by tree roots, LCSD would conduct site inspection with Members concerned after the meeting to assess the level of impact.

LCSD would commission engineering consultants for the design work of the four works items under the Improvement Work at the Cycling Area in Hong Kong Velodrome Park for integrating the overall characteristics of the Hong Kong Velodrome Park and Hong Kong Velodrome into the new facilities. After LCSD had obtained funding approval, the works department would proceed with the related procurement procedures, and more detailed information on the works would be provided at that time.

The Cycling Area in the Hong Kong Velodrome Park had been provided in 2017 in view of public aspiration, the floor tiles paved then were identical to those used in parks in general. Subsequently, as the Cycling Area had become increasingly popular among children and the floor tiles were considered inappropriate for cycling, LCSD had submitted the funding application for the improvement works at the meeting in response to public demand and Members’ opinions.

Besides, LCSD had provided a venue in each district for children to ride balance bikes. In Sai Kung, the venue for balance bike activities was provided in Tseung Kwan O Waterfront Park. Upon completion of the improvement works, one more venue would be made available for children to ride balance bikes. LCSD would continue to review other venues in the district which were appropriate for balance bike activities, and the major considerations were the provision of venues with a spacious area and flat road surface without causing danger or inconvenience to park visitors, etc.

50. Mr FUNG Kwan-on indicated that according to the information of the previous year, Po Lam Sitting-out Area had been included in the project. He enquired whether LCSD had examined the situation of Po Lam Sitting-out Area and why it was not included in the project. 51. Mr Ricky OR said LCSD had expressed that engineering consultants would be engaged, but it did not list out the estimates of the consultants’ fees and the project items or the ratio among various works items, making it difficult for DFMC to assess if the consultancy fees were reasonable. LCSD should also state whether the project was undertaken under the design and build approach, or whether the consultants were only responsible for the consultancy work. Although only little information on the project outline was provided in the paper, the amount of funding sought added up to $2 million. Therefore, he opined that it was necessary for DFMC to obtain more detailed information for processing the funding application. 52. Ms Debby CHAN asked LCSD about the criteria for selecting green areas for beautification works, and whether the beautification works would only concentrate on landscaping with shrub planting or would implement landscaping works for flower beds and/or trees under the management of LCSD together. Besides, planting and removal of trees of inappropriate species were frequent in Hong Kong and would pose hazard to pedestrians. She enquired whether LCSD possessed the expertise to choose the appropriate plant species or

9

whether it would consult TMO or other departments concerned. 53. Mr CHENG Chung-man pointed out that large-scale activities were often organised in the Hong Kong Velodrome Park, and that the existing planters which were movable would facilitate crowd dispersion. He worried that installation of fixed railings would inhibit diversion of pedestrian flow and bring inconvenience to users. He requested LCSD to provide diagrams of the movable stainless steel railings proposed to be installed for DFMC’s reference. 54. Mr CHUN Hoi-shing enquired about LCSD’s criteria for selecting green areas for beautification works. As the uplifting of pavement by tree roots involved safety issues, he suggested that green areas which posed safety risks be included in the project. 55. Ms Alice KONG of LCSD responded as follows:

LCSD was responsible for managing plants in flower beds and at the roadside within 10 metres from the road kerb of a trunk road, and for planting trees in accordance with the guidelines, suggested planting locations and tree species stipulated by TMO.

Besides, LCSD staff responsible for plant management would learn how to grow different species of plants through various courses concerned. If the need for plant replacement due to weather, period of planting or other special factors was identified during regular inspections, they would use their expertise to assess how to replace the shrubs in the flower beds. The main objective of the funding application was to plant and manage shrubs excluding tree planting or improvement of tree roots. However, in case trees managed by LCSD affected the structure of flower beds, LCSD would discuss how to implement improvement works with the departments concerned.

Po Lam Sitting-out Area was a pet garden. To provide a suitable environment for the public to stay with their dogs, the park was mainly a turfed area. If the grass did not grow well because of the weather or other conditions, LCSD would carry out improvement works. LCSD would continue to examine and follow up the situation at Po Lam Sitting-out Area.

As specified in the paper concerned, the Improvement Work at the Cycling Area in Hong Kong Velodrome Park comprised four works items. According to the preliminary estimates, the costs of hiring consultants and carrying out design were about $380,000, while the costs of taking out insurance, dumping demolition waste and paying the related licence fees were about $400,000. Redevelopment of the foundation of the Cycling Area was also required for resurfacing with hard-surface coating specifically used for sports activities, and the budget was prepared by making reference to the estimates of similar improvement projects. After LCSD had obtained the funding approval, the works department would formally proceed with the procurement procedures, and more detailed information on the works would be available then.

The location of the proposed installation of stainless steel railings, as shown in the Annex to the paper, was currently separated by large and movable planters only. The adjacent cycle track could be separated after installing the additional facilities, thereby preventing toddlers from rushing out from the Cycling Area or bicycles from entering the Cycling Area from cycle tracks outside. Seats would also be provided in the shaded area near the stainless steel railings for parents or the public to take a rest and sit down to look after their children. In addition, the colour of the floor after resurfacing would be different from that of the floor tiles paved in

10

the park, and the boundary of the Cycling Area could thus be easily identified. 56. The Chairman asked LCSD whether the pictures of the stainless steel railings and seats proposed for installation were available. He also enquired whether LCSD could submit the funding application (Phase II) within this year if Members further identified some locations where beautification works were required after the site inspection. 57. Ms Alice KONG of LCSD responded that the pictures provided for the contractor as reference for procurement could be provided for Members’ perusal after the meeting, but the final forms could be confirmed only after the project had been approved and had commenced. Besides, if Members still wanted to propose any greening locations where beautification works were required after the meeting, LCSD could submit the funding application (Phase II). 58. Mr Francis CHAU stated that there were altogether 8 parks, 31 sitting-out areas and numerous roadside planters in Sai Kung and Tseung Kwan O, which were managed by LCSD. He suggested that LCSD should provide a list of the green areas for DFMC’s record. Members might put forward proposals in future having regard to the corresponding resources available, but they should keep in mind the limited amount of funding allocated to DFMC. 59. The Chairman requested Members to note that the funding application comprised three items, and DFMC was not required to endorse all items at once. He suggested that LCSD should directly send the list of the green areas under its management in Sai Kung and Tseung Kwan O to Members by email for reference. Members might give advice on LCSD’s green areas in future and LCSD, upon receipt of advice, might submit funding applications to DFMC. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that the funding allocation of $2.1 million was endorsed to take forward two projects, namely, Minor Emergency Maintenance and Improvement Works for Recreation and Sports Facilities in Sai Kung District (2020-2021) and Beautification Works for the Parks and Green Belts in Sai Kung and Tseung Kwan O. 60. The Chairman continued that there were two ways of processing the funding application for the Improvement Work at the Cycling Area in Hong Kong Velodrome Park. Firstly, the established practice of the Home Affairs Department (HAD) could be followed by carrying detailed design subsequent to the endorsement of funding for a project, and further report would be made to DFMC. This approach was adopted in implementing the projects “SK-DMW257 Sitting-out Area at Lam Shing Road”, “SK-DMW298 Addition of sitting-out facilities at the Tseung Kwan O South Waterfront Promenade” and “SK-DMW369 Construction of sitting-out facilities in District Open Space in Area 72, Tseung Kwan O”. Secondly, DFMC would process the application after obtaining the supplementary information. Besides, he indicated that LCSD had been using this format all the time since DFMC had not requested LCSD to provide more detailed information when processing its funding applications in the past. He suggested that LCSD should provide the related information, such as breakdown of project costs and diagrams of the seats and stainless steel railings, after the meeting. 61. Mr Ricky OR remarked that if an open tender was invited by a government department, it was certain that tenders in such format submitted by other commercial establishments could not meet the specifications. It was undesirable that government departments did not provide the most essential information when submitting funding applications to DCs. If Members had not raised enquiries, LCSD would not have verbally provided the information a while ago, and there would not be any supplementary information tabled at the meeting for perusal. He

11

opined that the paper of the funding application was in need of enhancement, and he preferred to adopt the second method of processing, which was to request LCSD to provide adequate information to DFMC at the next meeting for vetting instead of endorsing the funding application in haste at the moment. 62. Mr LEUNG Li supported the Improvement Work at the Cycling Area in Hong Kong Velodrome Park, but a large amount of fund had been requested while no breakdown of project costs had been provided in the paper. According to a paper submitted for the District Works Working Group meeting held on 17 April 2018, LCSD had conducted a questionnaire survey with park users on the Hong Kong Velodrome Park’s “Trial Scheme of Shared Cycling Path and Cycling Area of Hong Kong Velodrome Park” and had submitted the review report. The scope of the questionnaire survey included the frequency of usage and users’ satisfaction with the Cycling Area. He recommended that LCSD make reference to the paper concerned and provide detailed information at the next meeting, including whether the Cycling Area was well received by the local community, the number of users and information on works items, with a view to facilitating DFMC to vet the application. He also recommended that LCSD review the lighting problem as well because users considered the lighting at the venue inadequate as mentioned by LCSD in the same paper. 63. The Chairman understood that LCSD had always adopted the same format for submitting funding applications previously because it had not been requested to provide more detailed information for processing the funding applications. He proposed that LCSD should consolidate afresh and submit the breakdown of project costs, diagrams concerning the design of seats and railings, and the papers concerned in the past to DFMC. 64. Mr LUK Ping-choi remarked that breakdown of project costs and detailed information would generally be provided for an application involving such a large amount of funding. As DCs had an important gatekeeping role to play, DFMC would be criticised if it approved the funding application with only simple information in hand. He requested LCSD to provide further information before the next meeting. 65. Mr Francis CHAU indicated that he did not want to wait until the next DFMC meeting to process the works proposal, which had been put forward last year. The working group concerned had dealt with funding of projects in the past. He suggested that the Secretariat and LCSD integrate the relevant information into a supplementary paper for vetting by DWFMWG. 66. The Chairman said if all Members would join DWFMWG, the issue might be discussed at its meeting to be held in April and be recommended to DFMC for endorsement. Moreover, the current-term DFMC had adopted a more stringent approach to processing funding applications. He requested LCSD to take note of Members’ views and provide detailed information on the funding application, including diagrams and breakdown of expenses, to DFMC for reference. Furthermore, he suggested that LCSD study the paper regarding the conduct of survey on pedestrian flow for the proposals to construct walkway cover (i.e. SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 6/20), attach the papers concerning the relevant motions or works proposals, or provide the paper numbers of relevant papers to DFMC for reference. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that the funding application for the Improvement Work at the Cycling Area in Hong Kong Velodrome Park would be handled by DWFMWG.

12

III. Matters Arising (A) Request to follow up the construction and future operation of the Hong Kong Football

Association’s Football Training Centre in Area 77 and to make good preparation for its interfacing with the periphery leisure facilities to generate complementary and synergistic effects Request the Football Training Centre in Tseung Kwan O to designate a better location for its entrance/exit, adjust the spotlight settings and open its venue to the public as soon as possible Request for providing a pedestrian link to connect Tseung Kwan O South Waterfront Promenade with Football Training Centre (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 5/20)

(Paragraphs 19-21 of the minutes of the meeting on 10 September 2019) 67. Members noted the written reply from the Jockey Club Hong Kong Football Association Football Training Centre. 68. The Chairman said, as stated in the written reply, improvement works would be carried out at the Football Training Centre, including installation of solar panel lights and a staircase which were anticipated to be completed by the end of March 2020 and by the end of 2020 respectively. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that the above agenda item would be deleted. (B) Suggest providing road signs and a shade structure near Junk Bay Chinese Permanent

Cemetery, request the Management Board of the Chinese Permanent Cemeteries to carry out district consultation on significant alteration or extension before implementation and submission to SKDC for discussion and suggest setting up a first aid station and providing an escalator

(Paragraph 25 of the minutes of the meeting on 10 September 2019) 69. The Chairman said Members might submit works proposals for adding road signs and shades to DFMC. The second half of the motion involved the planning issues concerning the alteration of Junk Bay Chinese Permanent Cemetery. Any other relevant proposals to be raised in future might be handed over to other committees, such as the Housing, Planning and Development Committee, for follow-up work. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that the above agenda item would be deleted. (C) The issue referred by the Traffic & Transport Committee: Conducting survey on

pedestrian flow for the proposals to construct covered walkway (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 6/20) (Paragraphs 26-34 of the minutes of the meeting on 10 September 2019) 70. Mr Eddie LEE, Architect (Works) 7, HAD, introduced the paper. He also said that when walkway cover projects were to be taken forward in other districts, the respective CWWG would handle the works proposals in batches based on the survey findings on pedestrian flow. If there were 12 works proposals, they would be divided into two to three batches for HAD’s term consultant to conduct preliminary studies. The preliminary study included enquiries about underground utilities made to utilities companies, such as the CLP Power Hong Kong Limited, The Hong Kong and China Gas Company Limited or other government departments, and problems related to underground utilities affecting the project cost estimate and feasibility

13

of the works proposals. Upon completion of the preliminary study, HAD would give an account of the study report, rough cost estimate and estimated cost of feasibility study to CWWG. HAD would then decide if a detailed feasibility study would be conducted, including excavation on roads for trial pits to ascertain the actual locations of underground utilities. 71. The Chairman said if Members decided to continue to take forward walkway cover projects in the current term, they might have further discussion at meetings of CWWG, which had just been established. He also asked the Secretariat to update Annex 2 by specifying that some project proponents were Members of the previous term. 72. Mr CHUNG Kam-lun supported the continuation of taking forward walkway cover projects and opined that, in the light of past experience, thorough consideration should be given prior to works commencement to obviate controversies in future. He thought that DFMC should lay down criteria for assigning priority to projects, and proposed to consider assigning higher priority to projects with low project costs, limited scope of works and higher cost-effectiveness. For example, the project “Construction of a walkway cover outside the entrance of Yan Ming Court at Yan King Road” proposed by him and the project “Construction of rain shelter along the walkway between Beverly Garden and Tseung Kwan O Plaza (extension)” proposed by another Member, both involved a 10-metre walkway cover and might benefit 1 800 to 2 000 pedestrians. 73. Mr LUK Ping-choi said the rain shelter along the walkway connecting Beverly Garden to Tseung Kwan O Plaza had been completed a few years ago. The original scope of works included a 10-metre-long extension, but the extension works had been shelved due to objection from The Owners’ Committee of Tseung Kwan O Plaza. As the findings of the survey on pedestrian flow showed that more than 1 000 pedestrians would use the walkway during some hours at present, he wanted to have further communication with The Owners’ Committee of Tseung Kwan O Plaza. He reiterated that the “Construction of rain shelter along the walkway between Beverly Garden and Tseung Kwan O Plaza (extension)” was an unfinished old project rather than a new works proposal. 74. Mr Andrew CHAN enquired whether DFMC would accept new works proposals. Besides, as shown in the findings of the survey on pedestrian flow, the walkway cover involved in the works proposal “Suggest to construct walkway cover off Fu Ning Garden for connecting to Tseung Kwan O Hospital” would have a low usage rate. He therefore proposed to formally remove the works proposal. 75. Mr Frankie LAM said in addition to 3 468 pedestrians having been recorded at the location of the proposal “Covered pedestrian link between the crossing at Sheung Ning Road and Hang Hau MTR Station”, 2 371 pedestrians had been recorded at the location of the proposal “Construction of walkway covers at Yuk Nga Lane, Po Fung Road and Mau Yip Road” as well. If only minor construction works would be carried out, then there would be no chance for implementing the large-scale projects. He also proposed to adopt the way of providing shelter for green minibus (GMB) stand for construction of walkway cover because the method was not only capable of performing the basic functions but could also save costs. Besides, he had raised a new walkway cover proposal, hoping DFMC would follow it up. 76. Mr LUI Man-kwong indicated that Members held different views on the idea of implementing minor works projects first. Members should draw up a set of fairer criteria

14

supported by data to determine the priority of project implementation, such as preliminary project estimates, length of walkway covers and figures of pedestrian flow. In his opinion, priority might be accorded to walkway covers with shorter length and heavier pedestrian flow, while other proposals should also be taken forward as far as possible. 77. Ms Debby CHAN remarked that there would be no chance to construct walkway covers in less densely populated areas like Sai Kung if the findings of survey on pedestrian flow was taken as the criterion for implementing the proposed projects. She opined that the situations in Sai Kung and Tseung Kwan O were different, and DFMC should identify a pertinent method to formulate the criteria. She also opined that the periods during which the survey on pedestrian flow in the area was conducted for the proposal “Suggest to construct walkway cover at Fuk Man Road off Tang Shiu Kin Sports Ground” were not the peak periods of pedestrian flow. 78. Mr CHOI Ming-hei agreed with Mr Frankie LAM and Ms Debby CHAN. Apart from taking into consideration project costs and findings of the survey on pedestrian flow, he proposed that the year when works proposals had been submitted should also be included as a reference indicator. He cited the proposal “Construction of walkway covers at Yuk Nga Lane, Po Fung Road and Mau Yip Road”, which was made by Mr Frankie LAM, as an example. It had been more than 10 years since the project had been proposed, and the failure to implement it had caused inconvenience to residents. 79. Mr Francis CHAU said CWWG should convene meetings as soon as possible for the follow-up work. Besides, it was difficult to handle all works proposals pending follow-up work with the existing resources. Some Members suggested that proposed walkway covers shorter in length be implemented first, but in fact the most difficult and resource-intensive stage of taking forward projects was to deal with underground utilities. He cited the project “Provision of covers for the pedestrian walkway at Ngan O Road in front of Wo Ming Court/Yuk Ming Court” to be implemented by the Highways Department as an example for illustration. The project was originally scheduled to commence by the end of 2019, but had not yet been implemented due to technical problem. As regards his works proposal put forward earlier, the facility was converted to an arbour due to the problem of underground utilities, and for the same reason, it was further converted to seats without the function of a rain shelter. He continued that it was necessary to engage consultants to relocate underground utilities for the construction of walkway covers, but Members might still consider providing rain shelter as an alternative. For example, DFMC had previously been striving for the construction of a walkway cover at Man Kuk Lane in Hang Hau, and could not follow up subsequently due to various causes. Finally, SKDO had provided four rain shelters to replace the original plan of constructing a walkway cover. He proposed that the consultants should also follow up the provision of rain shelters since the Works Section of SKDO might not have the related resources to solve the problem of underground utilities. 80. The Chairman said the consultants had conducted the survey on pedestrian flow during specific periods as suggested by respective project proponents. As regards the proposal “Construction of rain shelter along the walkway between Beverly Garden and Tseung Kwan O Plaza (extension)”, he had consulted The Owners’ Committee of Tseung Kwan O Plaza, which had reservations about the proposal at this stage. The Chairman opined that further communication with The Owners’ Committee of Tseung Kwan O Plaza might be made, and DFMC would continue to take forward the proposal.

15

81. The Chairman continued that some works proposals pending follow-up work had been made a long time ago. Although some of them still had practical needs for implementation, some had lost the practical needs or become less urgent due to changes in the surrounding environment. He requested Members to consult local residents after the meeting and discuss the proposals at the meetings of CWWG. CWWG might select and refer six works proposals to the Works Section of HAD for conducting preliminary studies and preparing project cost estimates. After the Works Section of HAD had obtained the results, it would hold further discussion at the CWWG meetings on how to follow up the proposals concerned. Moreover, Members might submit new works proposals in response to the current community development for record by the Secretariat. However, as there were still 12 works proposals pending follow-up work at present, the proposals already in existence would be handled in the first phase. Members might submit new works proposals before the specific deadline, which would mark the start of the second phase. The works proposals which were unattended in the first phase might, together with the new proposals submitted in the second phase, undergo a new round of survey on pedestrian flow for follow-up work in due course. 82. The Chairman concluded by expressing his wish to convene the first meeting of CWWG in April for discussion on the following two items: (a) to shelve some works proposals without practical need or urgency; and (b) to select a few works proposals for the Works Section of HAD to conduct feasibility studies and prepare the project cost estimates, and further follow up the proposals after obtaining the related data. He also requested Members to consult local residents on the works proposals pending follow-up work and to discuss the consultation outcomes at the CWWG meetings. (D) Use of SKDC notice boards 83. As a motion was in relation to the above item, the Chairman proposed and Members agreed to discuss the two matters together. Review the operation and management of SKDC notice boards and suggest the notice

boards be open for use by SKDC Members for publicity of district matters (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 19/20) 84. The Chairman said the motion was moved by Ms LEUNG Hin-yan and seconded by Ms Debby CHAN, Messrs Stanley HO, Brandon YIP and LAI Wai-tong. 85. Members noted the written reply SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 26/20 from SKDO. 86. Mr LUI Man-kwong pointed out the need of exploring the feasibility before making SKDC notice boards available for public use. Besides, he was not opposed to the use of notice boards by SKDC Members, but it was necessary to clearly define the content to be posted thereon by SKDC and its Members in advance. For example, if SKDC had voted on some controversial matters, but some Members who had voted against the matters still put up materials related to their standpoints on the notice boards, residents might be confused about the stances of SKDC and its Members. 87. Miss Joey WONG, Assistant District Officer (Sai Kung)2, SKDO said SKDC notice boards were mainly used for displaying the work and related information of SKDC to the public, including membership lists and contact details of SKDC Members, publicity posters of arts and cultural activities funded by SKDC, and election-related information such as information on

16

voter registration. The content of the information displayed on the notice boards would be timely updated by the Secretariat depending on the need and actual situation. There were more than 40 SKDC notice boards or so currently provided in Sai Kung district. As frequent updates of the above information were not required, information would be updated and SKDC notice boards would be cleaned about once in every two months at present. SKDO kept an open mind on how to further enhance the use of notice boards and improve the mechanism and management of information dissemination. Nevertheless, she requested Members to make reference to the following principles for consideration: (a) SKDC notice boards were required to display information related to the work of SKDC; and (b) the content of the materials posted on SKDC notice boards was prohibited from involving personal publicity and the content of materials on the work of SKDC had to be related to resolutions endorsed by or matters having the consensus of SKDC. Besides, SKDC Members might display materials showing their personal preferences/views at the designated roadside spots allocated to them or within the area of their ward offices. 88. Mr FUNG Kwan-on said he had identified many vacant SKDC notice boards and worn-out posters were not removed from some notice boards. He enquired whether SKDO had adequate resources to manage the SKDC notice boards. If SKDC did not want to put up materials showing personal publicity or personal preference/view, it should, as stated in the paper, post materials related to the work of SKDC on the notice boards for public perusal, such as agenda, minutes and schedule of meetings. 89. Ms Debby CHAN enquired whether anti-epidemic work was categorised as information relating to the work of SKDC. She also enquired about the Secretariat’s staff deployment for managing SKDC notice boards, the feasibility of requesting the Secretariat to produce posters for posting by SKDC Members, and the time required for updating all SKDC notice boards. Moreover, the constituency of Sai Kung Islands was of a vast area, but the designated roadside spots allocated to her was less than 10 and many aged villagers did not know how to use the Internet. She therefore suggested that the notice boards provided in villages be used for dissemination of information. She also suggested that DFMC should discuss the guidelines for using SKDC notice boards to facilitate the handling of SKDC matters and explore the feasibility of making some notice boards available for public use. 90. Mr Stanley HO clarified that more than four notice boards were provided in Pak Sha Wan, and the number was different from that as mentioned in the paper. The motion paper should have referred to the notice boards in the entire Sai Kung district rather than SKDC notice boards only. He considered the information listed in the table inaccurate and proposed to update the number of notice boards under SKDC and DLO/SK. In addition, Pak Sha Wan stretched across an extensive area and many aged villages had no idea how to use the Internet. It was difficult to disseminate information to all residents through distribution of leaflets. Such being the case, many local residents relied on the SKDC notice boards to understand the operation of SKDC, but such notice boards were often left vacant. If the use of these notice boards could not be optimised, he proposed to consider making them available to villagers or SKDC Members to assist in management, so as to achieve the objectives of making good use of public money and space. Besides, he opined that a two-way mechanism should be jointly established to deal with the ways of using SKDC notice boards to disseminate information. 91. Ms LEUNG Hin-yan said the information on the Lunar New Year activities for which funding support had been previously approved by the full council of SKDC was not posted on the SKDC notice boards, and the group photo of SKDC of the previous term was still displayed

17

on the notice board installed at the bus stop in Sheung Tak Estate the day before. Neither was the information related to the work of the Government, such as anti-epidemic information, conversion of Sai Kung Outdoor Recreation Centre into a quarantine centre and improvement works of paving blocks at Sai Kung Old Town, posted on the notice boards. According to SKDO’s written reply, SKDC notice boards could only be used to display information on the work of SKDC and the related matters. Information involving excessive personal publicity could not be displayed thereon. She queried why SKDC Members who formed SKDC were not allowed to put up materials related to the work of district matters on the notice boards. Besides, the written reply did not respond to the specific improvement proposals as set out in her motion paper. 92. Mr TSE Ching-fung said only a poster containing the group photo of SKDC was posted on SKDC notice boards all the time. He agreed to improve the management of or carry out revitalisation works for the notice boards. He proposed to make reference to other DCs in this respect by displaying agenda of SKDC meetings and publicity posters of activities on the notice boards, inviting the public to attend the meetings and participating in the activities. He also requested SKDO to reconsider the feasibility of allowing SKDC Members to use the notice boards, and examine if each constituency had been provided with an equal number of notice boards. 93. Mr LUI Man-kwong opined that utilisation of SKDC notice boards was in need of improvement, and he kept an open mind on requests for displaying more SKDC information or the district work of SKDC Members on the notice boards. However, he was concerned about the difference between the two kinds of information. He proposed to explore the further utilisation of SKDC notice boards at meetings of the Working Group of Publicity and Editing established under SKDC of the previous term, or at DFMC meetings. He also proposed the establishment of a formal mechanism to examine the content of the materials displayed. Nevertheless, this was a more complicated management approach. A simpler way of handling was to update the information on some district activities on a regular basis. 94. Mr LUK Ping-choi understood that it took time for SKDO and the Secretariat to make work arrangements. As the group photos of the current-term SKDC and personal photos of SKDC Members had just been taken last week, printing of the poster of the current-term SKDC was yet to commence. Owing to the COVID-19 epidemic, the flexible arrangement of working from home had been implemented for most of the time in February. There would be a certain degree of difficulty if SKDO and the Secretariat were requested to produce and arrange for displaying posters containing anti-epidemic information during the outbreak of COVID-19. However, he believed that the management of SKDC notice boards would be improved in future. Moreover, conflicts had occurred among users of a notice board in Sheung Tak Estate many years ago, in which the users had competed for using the notice board by covering each other’s posters. The situation was undesirable, so SKDC consequently decided that personal posters should not be displayed on the notice boards. He cited an example of the notice board at Exit A of MTR Tseung Kwan O Station, which was located within his constituency. He wondered how the priority and period of displaying materials would be determined if he and another SKDC Member of the adjacent constituency both wanted to put up materials at the said location. He worried that dispute would arise if the usual practice was changed. He hoped that SKDC and SKDO would continue to maintain good communication on how to improve the management of SKDC notice boards. 95. Mr CHAN Wai-lit asked the Secretariat about the number of posters that had been put

18

up on the notice boards and the frequency of updating the posted materials in the past four years. He also enquired whether including the names of organisers of arts and cultural activities in the related publicity posters would be classified as promoting individuals/organisations. He further enquired about the requirements of submitting applications for displaying information on the notice boards. He suggested that SKDO should be authorised to vet the content of the materials to be posted, and that SKDC Members could assist in putting up the posters. He held that it was not necessary to print the names of SKDC Members on posters to be displayed if such posters showed information presented in a neutral manner and involved no personal publicity, such as anti-epidemic posters. Lastly, he enquired whether additional SKDC notice boards could be provided and suggested that the locations and number of notice boards in each constituency be reviewed, aiming to enable SKDC Members to put up information on the work of SKDC for public perusal in a fairer manner, and thereby enhancing their communication with residents. 96. Mr CHEUNG Wai-chiu said it was natural for SKDC notice boards to have a low utilisation rate given that they were seldom updated and provided little information. He proposed to make reference to the designation of spaces on the display panels in housing estates for use by SKDC Members of nearby constituencies, or to divide each notice board into two parts: one of them to be used by the Secretariat for displaying information, and the other would be for SKDC Members to display up-to-date information. 97. Mr CHOI Ming-hei pointed out that although SKDC Members might display banners at the designated roadside spots allocated to them, individual SKDC Members were allocated with fewer than 10 designated roadside spots. Some DC Members lacked publicity opportunities since they had neither ward offices for the time being nor the right to post publicity posters in housing estates. He opined that the feasibility of making SKDC notice boards available to SKDC Members for use should be explored, and the ways to ensure fair allocation of the locations and quantities of notice boards should be considered. 98. Mr Ricky OR said government departments would irregularly disseminate some information on public hygiene, election and so on. He queried why those existing resources had not been efficiently used by displaying the relevant publicity posters on the notice boards. Besides, he asked the SKDC Secretariat if there were designated staff specialising in the management of SKDC notice boards, and whether the existing manpower resources were adequate to cope with the additional duties. 99. Mr Cyrus CHOW, Assistant District Officer (Sai Kung)1, SKDO, responded as follows:

SKDO noted Members’ views and would examine how to enhance the management of SKDC notice boards with the existing human resources. He also agreed to Members’ proposal to establish a working group under SKDC which would specialise in discussing and deciding the content of the materials to be displayed on SKDC notice boards. SKDO was open-minded about the way of managing the notice boards and the mechanism for vetting the content for display, and would await Members to reach a consensus.

Regarding the feasibility of making SKDC notice boards available for public use, he reiterated that Members should pay close attention to the content to be displayed, differentiating whether it was about the viewpoints of SKDC or the personal views of individual SKDC Members. Moreover, controversies would be aroused easily if the public posted some materials concerning matters which had not been thoroughly discussed or on which consensus had not been reached by SKDC

19

Members. However, Members could still explore and formulate a mechanism to enhance public engagement.

Established under SKDC in the previous term, the Working Group on Arts and Cultural Activities had printed posters in which activities financed by SKDC funds were set out in a table, and had put up the publicity posters on SKDC notice boards. In view of the 2019 DC General Election, the materials displayed on the notice boards had been removed. Owing to the COVID-19 outbreak, the Secretariat could not make immediate arrangement for updating the notice boards. Besides, the full council of SKDC in the current term had approved some funding applications in January, but the publicity posters concerned were not posted because most of these activities had been terminated prematurely, could not be held as scheduled or due to some other reasons. If Members still identified any unremoved old materials on the notice boards, they might notify the Secretariat for follow-up work.

The Secretariat currently did not have any staff specialising in the management of the notice boards. Apart from updating the information on notice boards, the Secretariat was also responsible for other secretarial duties. The Secretariat would arrange for part-time staff to bring along the required documents for updating the information on notice boards in Tseung Kwan O New Town and Sai Kung rural areas at an interval of two months.

He agreed that display of documents concerning the meetings or achievements of SKDC would help enhance the interest of the public in SKDC’s operation.

100. Miss Joey WONG of SKDO responded as follows:

SKDC notice boards and SKDO notice boards were of different nature. Annex A set out the distribution of SKDC notice boards, and the notice boards mentioned by Members were SKDO notice boards. Some of the SKDO notice boards were also divided into two portions: one portion was managed by SKDO for displaying information of government departments, and the other was managed by DLO/SK for displaying information on land and works.

As the number of SKDC notice boards was not the same in each constituency at present, Members should include fairness as a factor of consideration when formulating the mechanism.

Members who requested provision of additional SKDC notice boards might submit works proposals to DFMC for taking them forward with the District Minor Works (DMW) fund, and the Works Section would study the feasibility of the works proposals.

She noted Members’ aspiration for displaying the publicity materials from government departments on SKDC notice boards. On posters designed by SKDC Members for promoting the information provided by the Government, consent from the departments concerned had to be obtained prior to display.

101. Mr Ricky OR remarked that the provision of SKDC notice boards was funded by the Government; therefore, the undesirable utilisation rate and management of the notice boards implied failure to ensure prudent use of public money. He recommended that the Secretariat review the existing human resources and deploy or arrange dedicated staff for the routine operation of SKDC notice boards. He also recommended that SKDC display the publicity posters or related information from other government departments on the notice boards upon receipt to enhance the utilisation rate. He hoped that the Secretariat would consider how to further enhance the utilisation rate of the notice boards.

20

102. The Chairman said SKDC notice boards could be used at three levels, i.e. SKDC, SKDC Members and the public. In the first place, he proposed to remove the old materials posted on the notice boards. In case Members identified any unremoved old materials on the notice boards, they might notify the Secretariat for follow-up work. In the second place, as regards the use of notice boards by SKDC, he proposed to authorise the Secretariat to display consultation papers related to works conducted nearby, anti-epidemic information, publicity posters of activities funded by SKDC and meeting schedules. The Secretariat might also circulate the information provided by the relevant government departments by email for endorsement by DFMC and display the endorsed materials afterwards. Besides, he did not think that the minutes of meetings could be posted on the notice boards due to their considerable length, limited size of the notice boards and locked glass windows of the display cases which prevented the public from turning the pages of the minutes. He proposed that the mechanism be established first so as to post more practical information on the SKDC notice boards. 103. Mr CHAN Wai-lit said SKDC Members could not put up posters on SKDC notice boards by themselves at this stage. He therefore enquired whether the Secretariat would vet the posters designed by SKDC Members and make arrangement for posting if they had met the requirements. 104. Ms LEUNG Hin-yan agreed to the Chairman’s approach to handling the matter. However, she thought that the workload of SKDC Members would be increased if they had to prepare posters on their own, and that SKDC Members also welcomed the Secretariat to make optimal use of SKDC notice boards. Besides, she deemed that it would not be meaningful to discuss the issue of fairness. Despite the larger size of the constituencies in Sai Kung rural areas, SKDC Members who belonged to constituencies in Sai Kung rural areas and the town centre were allocated with the same resources. In her opinion, there was no need to leave some SKDC notice boards vacant due to the worry that difference in the number of notice boards in various constituencies would result in unfairness. Even if additional notice boards were to be provided in future, Members should consider whether the addition was out of the need to use notice boards or the enhancement of fairness. She continued that DFMC had endorsed an allocation of more than $2 million as funding reserve for minor improvement and emergency works of district facilities, including maintenance and cleaning of notice boards. The use of notice boards should be optimised upon endorsement of funds. 105. The Chairman said the Secretariat would circulate information provided by the relevant government departments for DFMC’s endorsement by email, in addition, various committees and working groups might also take a more proactive approach by submitting proposals for requesting the Secretariat to put up posters of their activities for endorsement at meetings, or might hand over posters involving design elements to the current Working Group on Publicity, Editing and Civic Participation for follow-up work, approval, and addition of SKDC logo to the design. 106. Ms Debby CHAN recommended making reference to the criteria for display of posters at venues managed by the Housing Department and at other places as well as clearly stating the criteria which had obtained SKDC Members’ unanimous consensus. Otherwise, it would be difficult for the Secretariat to follow up the matter. She also enquired whether discussion items on an agenda or motions raised by SKDC Members were regarded as information concerning the work of SKDC.

21

107. Mr Stanley HO requested the Secretariat to update the information on the distribution of SKDC notice boards listed in Annex 1 because the notice boards in Nam Wai were attached with the logos of SKDO and SKDC. 108. The Chairman concluded that Members had not reached a consensus on the criteria for display of materials on notice boards for the time being. In the first stage, the notice boards could be used at SKDC level as a whole. The Secretariat might display consultation papers related to works conducted nearby, anti-epidemic information, posters of activities funded by SKDC and meeting schedules. Information from relevant government departments might also be circulated by email for endorsement by DFMC. During meetings, various committees and working groups might endorse the publicity posters of activities organised by them, which would be arranged for posting by the Secretariat. The Secretariat would then send the posters to DFMC by email for perusal. As the Secretariat would make arrangement for updating information on notice boards once every two months, it was proposed that information with no time frame should be displayed. In the second stage, the use of notice boards by SKDC Members or the public could be handled with a two-pronged approach. Firstly, SKDC Members needed to work out a set of criteria for the use of SKDC notice boards together. It was proposed that DWFMWG would follow up the formulation of criteria, and Members might raise suggestions on the types of materials to be posted then. Secondly, there being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that the motion was carried, and asked the Secretariat to write to HAD for relaying DFMC’s aspiration as well as recommending HAD to revise the guidelines and increase public participation. Lastly, Members might submit works proposals to DFMC if they wanted to install additional notice boards at individual locations. IV. Report Items (A) Progress Report of the Endorsed District Minor Works Projects and Progress Report of

the Feasibility Studies on District Minor Works Proposals (SKDC(DFMC) Paper Nos. 7/20 and 8/20) 109. Mr Chris CHEUNG enquired about the works progress of the projects “SK-DMW288(P) Request to construct a hiking trail leading to High Junk Peak at the appropriate location near to the hillside at the back of the Beaumount II; and SK-DMW326(P) Construct a hiking trail at Pak Shing Kok, Area 85 or the nearby areas in Tseung Kwan O to connect to the High Junk Peak”. He said the works proposals had been endorsed by DFMC on 10 May 2016 and had received an opposing view during the district consultation conducted in October 2017. There was no progress of the projects since then. 110. The Chairman said Members might follow up on the progress of various DMW projects at DWFMWG meetings as DFMC normally would not discuss the progress of individual projects at its meetings. 111. The Secretary said the latest information of the projects was not available at present, and the way of implementing the works would be discussed with the project proponents after the meeting. 112. Mr Chris CHEUNG said the projects should be taken forward as soon as possible if the objection had been settled. He also hoped that DWFMWG would expeditiously handle the backlog of projects which had been delayed for such a long time.

22

113. The Chairman invited Members to join the working groups under DFMC as early as possible to facilitate the conduct of their first meetings in April. 114. Mr CHOI Ming-hei enquired the exact completion date of the project “SK-DMW359(P) Suggest refurbishing and enhancing barrier-free facilities of Tsui Lam Community Hall”. 115. Miss Joey WONG of SKDO said the Architectural Services Department (ArchSD) was responsible for the project, and she would follow up the exact completion date with ArchSD after the meeting. 116. Ms LEUNG Hin-yan enquired about the progress in preparing the plans for the project “SK-DMW121(P) Installation of Rainshelter at the Public Light Bus Stops in Sai Kung District”. She also enquired how to follow up the progress of individual projects. 117. The Chairman said DMW block vote should not be used for implementing projects which would provide exclusive and/or private benefits to individual persons or organisations. As construction of GMB shelters would in effect benefit individual GMB operators, DFMC would not follow up the proposed project through the DMW programme. He continued that Members might follow up on the works items and progress of individual projects at the DWFMWG meetings, and might submit enquiries to the Secretariat directly. Moreover, works proposals endorsed by DFMC would be deemed to be endorsed projects which would then be included in the Progress Report of District Minor Works before March 2017. In fact, many endorsed projects could not be taken forward due to low feasibility and became backlog in the Progress Report of District Minor Works, pending resolution for a very long time. Subsequently, DFMC had endorsed the item “Improvement of the project endorsement procedure and review of the pending District Minor Works Projects” which set out that the new works proposals would be submitted to DFMC as works proposals for discussion. After the proposals had been approved by DFMC, they needed to pass the respective feasibility studies and settle the objections, if any. Subject to the endorsement and funding approval by DFMC, they would be formally referred to as endorsed works projects. The situation of long-term pending projects had been improved since then. Besides, DFMC had worked out criteria for removing long-term pending projects from the “Progress Report of the Feasibility Studies on District Minor Works Proposals”. DFMC might explore how to further remove the long-term pending projects. 118. Mr LAI Wai-tong enquired about the works progress of “SK-DMW305(P) Enhancement of the Tseung Kwan O South Waterfront Promenade” and “SK-DMW309(P) Proposed conversion of some sections of the footpaths along Tseung Kwan O South Waterfront Promenade, between Tseung Kwan O Sports Ground and Tseung Kwan O South Waterfront Promenade, as well as between LOHAS Park and the Northern Bridge at Tseung Kwan O Waterfront Promenade to jogging tracks”. 119. The Chairman requested the Works Section of HAD to provide the relevant information after the meeting. 120. Mr Calvin YU, Senior Executive Officer (Planning)22, LCSD, said the scope of the projects “SK-DMW305(P) Enhancement of the Tseung Kwan O South Waterfront Promenade” and “SK-DMW298 Addition of sitting-out facilities at the Tseung Kwan O South Waterfront Promenade” both covered Tseung Kwan O South Waterfront Promenade. Hence, as stated in the Progress Report of the Feasibility Studies on District Minor Works Proposals, “SK-

23

DMW298 Addition of sitting-out facilities at the Tseung Kwan O South Waterfront Promenade” and the feasible parts of “SK-DMW305(P) Enhancement of the Tseung Kwan O South Waterfront Promenade” would be combined and followed up together. At present, “SK-DMW298 Addition of sitting-out facilities at the Tseung Kwan O South Waterfront Promenade” was at the design stage. 121. The Chairman advised Members to make enquiries to the departments concerned if they wanted to understand the progress of individual projects. 122. Members endorsed the above two reports. (B) Financial estimates for funding District Minor Works (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 9/20) 123. The Secretary reported that as at 28 February 2020, the estimated expenditure for DMW of the 2019-20 financial year was about $16.29 million. 124. Members endorsed the above report. (C) Report on the management of leisure facilities in Sai Kung District by LCSD from

September 2019 to February 2020 (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 20/20) 125. Members endorsed the above report. (D) Report on community halls/community centre in Sai Kung District (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 10/20) 126. Members endorsed the above report. V. Proposals and Motions Raised by Members (A) The 4 works proposals raised by Members (1) Installation of ramps for wheelchair users and reconstruction of the stone staircase at

Fisherman Village in Pak Sha Wan (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 11/20)

127. The Chairman said the proposal was raised by Mr Stanley HO. 128. Mr Brandon YIP enquired whether there were other routes currently available for access by people with impaired mobility. 129. Mr Stanley HO said there was only one access connecting with Fisherman Village in Pak Sha Wan as stated in the paper. The elderly persons in the village could not attend any community activities due to their impaired mobility. With the increasing number of aged persons in the village, there was a pressing need for construction of an access ramp for wheelchair users. 130. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that DFMC agreed to

24

follow up the proposal and asked SKDO to follow up the matter. (2) Provision of seats at the viewing platforms at both ends of the Northern Bridge in

Tseung Kwan O (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 12/20)

131. The Chairman said the proposal was raised by Messrs TSE Ching-fung, LUK Ping-choi, Ricky OR, LEE Ka-yui, CHENG Chung-man, Ryan LEE, Ms Valerie WONG and Mr Andrew CHAN. 132. Mr LAI Wai-tong said he had consulted residents nearby, and they had reservations about the works proposal. At present, many people often gathered at the viewing platforms under the Northern Bridge, drinking, playing and making loud noises. As the proposed location was in immediate proximity to residential premises, he worried that more people would be attracted to stay at the viewing platforms longer after the seats were provided, thus aggravating the noise nuisance. If the works proposal was approved by DFMC, he requested SKDO to conduct an extensive district consultation for understanding the opinions of residents prior to works implementation.

133. The Chairman said according to the current procedures, the works agent would conduct consultation after the works proposal had been approved by DFMC. Regarding the projects included in the Progress Report of the Endorsed District Minor Works Projects, some had been followed up after settling the objections received while some had been shelved due to failure to settle objections. 134. Mr TSE Ching-fung said the project proponent had consulted the owners’ committee of Savannah which initially supported the works proposal. He continued that residents would stay at the proposed location longer for angling, enjoying the scenery and playing games. However, as seats were not provided there, they would bring some from their home. The sight of various kinds of seats at the location not only became an eyesore, but the seats might also cause accidents easily. He therefore would like to provide residents with seats for taking a rest. 135. The Chairman said the location concerned would be used as the spectator stand or stage for the dragon boat race event held every year. He suggested that SKDO should include nearby users such as dragon boat associations in the consultation. He also requested the departments concerned not to remove the seats placed there by residents at this stage. 136. Miss Joey WONG of SKDO noted the views of Members, indicating that feasibility study and extensive consultation would be carried out before taking forward each project, and that site inspection might be arranged for Members according to the actual needs. 137. Mr Brandon YIP enquired whether the project proponent had consulted individual persons of or the entire owners’ committee of Savannah, and whether the works proposal was raised by the owners’ committee of Savannah. 138. Mr TSE Ching-fung responded that the representatives of Savannah had stated their initial support for the works proposal in their reply. 139. Mr LAI Wai-tong requested the project proponent to clarify who was the representative

25

of Savannah as referred by him. 140. Mr TSE Ching-fung said since SKDO would consult the stakeholders in the area, he suggested that the procedure related to consultation be handled by SKDO. 141. The Chairman said Members might invite local personalities to give comments during the consultation. 142. Mr LUK Ping-choi cited the proposal “Construction of rain shelter along the walkway between Beverly Garden and Tseung Kwan O Plaza (extension)” as an example, pointing out that the proposal could not be taken forward due to receipt of an objection from The Owners’ Committee of Tseung Kwan O Plaza. Therefore, whether to approve the works proposal or not should be decided at this stage, and the stakeholders should be consulted after the proposal had been approved. He also suggested that interested Members might join the site inspection, and the Secretariat might inform Members of the arrangement by email. 143. Mr Andrew CHAN queried whether the identity of persons who gave support or raised objection to the works proposals should be specified in the project statements in future, and whether the related persons could represent their respective housing estates or areas. 144. The Chairman said there was no such requirement in the project statement, but Members might wish to obtain more detailed information during discussion. Besides, even if a works proposal was approved by DFMC, it would still be difficult to take it forward if a large number of objections were received during the consultation. He invited Members to put forward proposals which might solicit more support as far as possible so that the proposals could be smoothly implemented. 145. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that DFMC agreed to follow up the proposal and asked SKDO to follow up the matter. (3) Reinstallation of nest letterboxes at Po Toi O Chuen

(SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 13/20) 146. The Chairman said the proposal was raised by Mr Ryan LEE. 147. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that DFMC agreed to follow up the proposal and asked SKDO to follow up the matter. (4) Provision of a cover at the footpath at Po Hong Road and Po Fung Road near Serenity

Place (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 14/20)

148. The Chairman said the proposal was raised by Mr Frankie LAM. 149. The Chairman continued that Members might submit new works proposals for walkway cover for the Secretariat’s record. If the progress of taking forward the walkway cover projects in the first phase was satisfactory, he hoped to start conducting survey on pedestrian flow and feasibility study for the new works proposals on walkway cover within the current term of SKDC.

26

150. Mr Frankie LAM pointed out that residents of Tiu Keng Leng, Tseung Kwan O and Hang Hau could take shelter from rain at shopping centres. However, there were fewer similar facilities in Po Lam, hence he hoped that DFMC would approve the works proposal. 151. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that DFMC agreed to follow up the proposal and asked the Secretariat to put on record. (B) The 5 motions raised by Members (1) Request for redeveloping Tsui Lam Sports Centre into a multi-storey sports centre and

carrying out re-planning to allocate space for providing additional cultural, recreational and sports facilities (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 15/20)

152. The Chairman said the motion was moved by Mr Frankie LAM and seconded by Mr CHOI Ming-hei. 153. Members noted the written reply SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 21/20 from LCSD. 154. Mr CHOI Ming-hei said residents often lodged complaints about the dilapidated Tsui Lam Sports Centre which had been in use for many years. As refurbishment of the external walls and facilities inside the sports centre was required, he seconded the motion. 155. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that the motion was carried and asked the Secretariat to convey the aspiration of DFMC to LCSD in writing. (2) Request for improving the existing cover of the spectator stand at Tseung Kwan O

Sports Ground, providing spectator stands on various sides of the Sports Ground to increase the seating capacity and improving problems such as wind resistance and noise nuisance to meet the standards for staging major sports events (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 16/20)

156. The Chairman said the motion was moved by Mr CHOI Ming-hei and seconded by Mr Frankie LAM. 157. Members noted the written reply SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 22/20 from LCSD. 158. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that the motion was carried and asked the Secretariat to convey the aspiration of DFMC to LCSD in writing. (3) Request for improving the situation of light and noise nuisance generated from Tseung

Kwan O Sports Ground (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 17/20)

159. The Chairman said the motion was moved by Mr CHENG Chung-man and seconded by Messrs Ricky OR, LEE Ka-yui, Ryan LEE, Ms Valerie WONG, Messrs Andrew CHAN, TSE Ching-fung and LUK Ping-choi. 160. Members noted the written reply SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 23/20 from LCSD.

27

161. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that the motion was carried and asked the Secretariat to convey the aspiration of DFMC to LCSD in writing. (4) Request for providing additional automated external defibrillators at all sections of

Tseung Kwan O South Waterfront Promenade (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 18/20)

162. The Chairman said the motion was moved by Mr Ricky OR and seconded by Messrs CHENG Chung-man, LEE Ka-yui, Ryan LEE, Ms Valerie WONG, Messrs Andrew CHAN, TSE Ching-fung and LUK Ping-choi. 163. Members noted the written replies SKDC(DFMC) Paper Nos. 24/20 and 25/20 from LCSD and the Transport Department (TD). 164. Mr LAI Wai-tong welcomed LCSD to actively study the provision of additional automated external defibrillators (AEDs) at suitable locations. He enquired whether LCSD had provided first aid training courses recognised by the Labour Department for security guards or staff deployed at the venues under its management, and if yes, the number of staff members at each venue who possessed the relevant certificates. 165. Mr CHOI Ming-hei proposed to convey the aspiration of DFMC to the Fire Services Department (FSD) in writing. Promotion of the wider use of AEDs should begin with education, having regard to the provision of both hardware and software support. 166. Ms Alice KONG of LCSD responded that the Training Section of LCSD would arrange certificate courses on AED operation for its staff on a regular basis as well as encourage and arrange for attendance of venue managers, Amenities Assistants and other staff. LCSD had also required in the contracts for outsourced security services that the contractors concerned had to deploy at least one security guard who could operate AEDs to perform duties if the venues concerned were provided with AEDs. Security guards deployed at Tseung Kwan O Waterfront Park did not possess the related qualification for the time being. However, subsequent to the provision of AEDs at the venue, the contractor of outsourced security service concerned would be required to deploy security guards qualified for operating AEDs at the park to tie in with its operation. 167. Mr LAI Wai-tong enquired the number of staff members at each venue of LCSD in Sai Kung district who had received the related training. It might be inadequate if only one staff member knew how to operate AEDs at each venue. He requested LCSD to provide the relevant data to Members and the public for information. 168. Ms Alice HEUNG, Chief Leisure Manager (New Territories East), LCSD, responded as follows:

AED operation certificate was like first aid certificate in a way that both required regular renewal. Therefore, LCSD would arrange for its staff to attend refresher courses during specific periods. The data on the number of staff having received the related training courses was ever-changing and would be updated from time to time.

For venues already provided with AEDs, LCSD would encourage and arrange for staff to receive the relevant training. According to the contract for outsourced security services, the contractor concerned would be required to deploy at least one

28

security guard who could operate AEDs to perform duties if the venue concerned was provided with AEDs.

FSD had commenced the programme many years ago, whereas LCSD had started to provide AEDs at its aquatic venues, including swimming pools, beaches and water sports centres in 2011. Subsequently, LCSD had extended the provision of AEDs to land-based leisure venues with active facilities and high usage rates. In addition to venues managed by LCSD, AEDs were currently provided at many public places, and the organisations concerned would also provide training courses on AED operation. The effectiveness of the programme was satisfactory. If Members identified that AEDs might need to be provided at individual locations with high patronage, they could liaise with LCSD for follow-up work.

169. The Chairman requested LCSD to provide the figures of staff having attended the training courses on the operation of AEDs for DFMC’s information after the meeting. 170. Mr CHAN Wai-lit opined that staff equipped with proper training should be deployed for operating AEDs. Even if some staff had received the relevant training, it did not mean that they had the confidence and courage to operate AEDs under critical circumstances. When someone suffered from sudden cardiac arrest, frontline staff having attended the training courses might not be willing to render emergency treatment with the use of AEDs. He enquired whether LCSD could ensure that staff who knew how to operate AEDs could be deployed in all shifts of a shift roster. He also proposed that the Government draw up policies for promoting the use of AEDs to the general public. 171. Ms Alice HEUNG of LCSD responded as follows:

When LCSD promoted the programme on the installation of AEDs at venues under its management, some staff had reflected their worry about assuming legal liability related to AED operation. However, after providing a number of training courses in collaboration with organisations such as FSD and the Auxiliary Medical Service over the years, all staff indicated that operating AEDs was as easy as using a mobile phone if one followed the instructions as shown in the diagrams step by step.

As stated in the publicity materials of FSD, providing expeditious first aid treatment to those in need within the critical five-minute period might significantly increase the chance of saving lives. In this connection, LCSD had gradually extended the provision of AEDs from aquatic venues at the very beginning to land-based leisure venues. The programme was currently extended to cover waterfront parks, so that holders of AED operation certificates (including venue staff, staff hired by contractors and the public) might give first aid to persons in need prior to the arrival of firemen.

172. Mr Stanley HO enquired whether AEDs would only be provided at sports venues. He suggested that AEDs should be provided at locations with high pedestrian flow such as public piers. 173. The Chairman pointed out that public piers were under the management of TD, and DFMC might write to TD, suggesting TD make reference to the practice of LCSD and install AEDs at venues with high patronage which were under its management. He suggested writing to FSD to enhance the promotion and popularisation of the use of AEDs, and to enact legislation for providing exemption from legal liability for persons who attempted but failed to save persons in need by operating AEDs according to the procedures.

29

174. Mr CHAN Wai-lit pointed out that many venues managed by LCSD involved sports activities, so there was a higher chance for users of the venues to suffer from heart attack. He therefore asked LCSD to provide a list of its venues not equipped with AEDs for Members’ reference, facilitating Members to examine whether there was room for improvement in respect of providing AEDs. 175. The Chairman requested LCSD to provide supplementary information to DFMC. There being no objection from Members, the Chairman declared that the motion was carried and asked the Secretariat to convey the aspiration of DFMC to FSD and TD in writing. (5) Review the operation and management of SKDC notice boards and suggest the notice

boards be open for use by SKDC Members for publicity of district matters (SKDC(DFMC) Paper No. 19/20)

176. The Chairman said the above motion had been carried and discussed together with another item earlier. VI. Any Other Business 177. No other business was raised. VII. Date of Next Meeting 178. The Chairman declared that the next meeting of DFMC would be held on 12 May 2020 (Tuesday) at 9:30 a.m. The meeting was adjourned at 12:45 p.m. Sai Kung District Council Secretariat May 2020