and was chaired by the Deputy Secretary for the Environment. Government departments represented included the PWD, Transport, the Police and the Economic Services Branch of the Government Secretariat. The Transport Operators included representatives of Hong Kong Tramways Limited, "Star" Ferry Company Limited, Hong Kong and Yaumati Ferry Company Limited, China Motor Bus Company Limited and the Mass Transit Railway Corporation.
6
The major aim of the Study was to produce a strategy which, unlike the HKT proposal, provided solutions for the long term problems as well as the immediate needs of the corridor. A pre-condition was that the recommended transport strategy should allow all operators to be financially viable, with viability being defined as an internal rate of return of 12% per annum in real terms before tax. The analytical techniques employed included cost/ benefit analyses based on the economic cost/benefit to the community as well as the financial cost/benefit to the operators.
7
Having considered a wide range of options, including the one from HKT and the full MTR Island Line, the Study recom- mended that the transport strategy for the Island Corridor should be based on the phased development of a segregated mass transit light rail system with two interchange facilities with the MTR Modified Initial System at Admiralty and Chater/Pedder Stations. This system would be complemented by bus services improved as a consequence of the opening of the Aberdeen Tunnel and the new waterfront express roads, which will allow the further development of express bus services and bus priority measures. PLB numbers would be reduced and their operating methods further controlled to ease traffic flow. But the essence of the strategy would be the use of Light Rail Vehicles (LRVs). In the initial phase, the LRVs would operate on-street and, in its final phase, the mass transit system would be capable of carrying, entirely underground, any- thing from 30, 000 to 60,000 passengers an hour in each direction, depending on the options eventually chosen. Careful phasing of the development of the strategy would provide flexibility to meet the changing needs of the corridor and the mass transit light rail system would represent an extension of the MTR.
8
The study showed that there are a number of arguments in favour of the phased development of a mass transit light rail system in the Island Corridor. Chief amongst these is that a light rail system could begin operation as early as 1981 with minimal disruption during construction, while offering good performance and high capacity. Similar light rail systems have proved successful
CONFIDENTIAL