TNAG-0955-FCO40-1174-Legislation-for-traffic-on-roads-in-Hong-Kong-1980 — Page 24

- 13 -

passengers compared to the buses, higher fares, and the undesir- able feature of travelling underground.

6.3 The L.R.T. would have a longer journey time than the I.L. due to having more intermediate stops but because its capital and operating costs would be lower than for an underground railway, its fares would be lower. It would also have a lower proportion of seated passengers than the bus.

6.4 The bus network has one distinct advantage over the other modes

the ability to run non-stop. Thus the journey by through non-stop bus for the passenger from a suburban estate to Central could be quicker (and cheaper) than if he were to use a feeder

bus and the Island Line to Central. The 180-capacity buses would have two-thirds of their passengers seated the highest

proportion of any of the modes. Because of their smaller loads than a railway car, buses would run more frequently. fact if the light loads which I.C.S. forecast for an underground line

were to come true a service interval of l♦ minutes would be the

best that the I.L. could justify on economic grounds.

In

6.5 Buses and trams together should be able to perpetuate the

current feature of relatively cheap fares. They will certainly be cheaper than an underground railway, as demonstrated by the

present cross-harbour bus fare of $1.50 and the MTR fare of

$2.50 $3.00 for a journey between the same points. Surface transport generally is more convenient and apparent to the intending passenger because he is able to see it whereas, the

only indication of an underground railway is the station entrance.

7. OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS IN THE EVENT OF AN UNDERGROUND RAILWAY

7.1.Effect on Peak Pattern

As CMB introduces more larger capacity buses along the Island Corridor, so the relationship between the peak and off-peak periods becomes more pronounced whilst the actual peak period

../14.