Page 53 of 166
96
96
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
MR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN, CHAIRMAN OF THE MARKETS AND STREET TRADERS SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in English):—Mr. MA asks three questions relating to a proposal for a UC market in Mei Foo Sun Chuen under the Lai Chi Kok Flyover. Recalling a survey conducted earlier by the Department to ascertain the interest of hawkers in moving to such a new market, he asked for the survey results and whether solutions to environmental pollution and sewerage problems associated with such a market project have been found, and enquired when the Council would be further consulted on the project.
In response to Mr. MA's first question, an opinion survey by way of questionnaires for collating views from 73 Sham Shui Po Market tenants and 159 licensed wet goods hawkers in the vicinity of the Sham Shui Po Market, was conducted in November 1988. The purpose of the survey was to gather the views of the market tenants and hawkers on the viability of the proposed project, and, if a market is to be built at that site, whether there was sufficient interest from these hawkers to move their operations to the new market.
The results are as follows:
(a) 85% of the SSP Market tenants and 66% of the hawkers were not in favour of the location of the market under the flyover;
(b) nearly all existing Sham Shui Po market tenants and 90% of the hawkers surveyed indicated no interest in bidding for stalls; and
(c) there were mixed opinions on whether the proposed market would be viable, with the consensus view doubting its viability.
In response to Mr. MA's second question, the Environmental Protection Department has been asked to advise on the environmental aspects of a market situated under a flyover. They have stated they have no fundamental objection to the siting of the market but cautioned the department on the problem of possible traffic dust disposition generated by diesel vehicles. They advise that the problem could be minimized by providing adequate covering to the market. Civil Engineering Services Department were consulted on the problem of drainage (not sewerage) and have advised that the existing storm water drains can be diverted to the drainage reserve and the foul water drainage system of the market connected to the nearest manhole for a cost of $375,000 i.e. a relatively small amount.
In response to Mr. Ma's third question, Architectural Services Department have completed a feasibility study on the project. The department is taking a final look at the proposed project with particular emphasis on its cost of construction and financial viability and it is hoped to forward a Committee Paper to Council within the next 2-3 months.
MR. MA LEE-WO (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, according to the survey conducted by the Urban Services Department, the Sham Shui Po market tenants and the hawkers are not in favour of the location of the market under the flyover. Has the survey identified the causes why the proposed market is not acceptable to them? Is it due to the limited scope of the market or any other reasons? If the market under the flyover is to be built, what measures will the Department take to attract hawkers and market tenants to bid the stalls there?
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
97
to them? Is it due to the limited scope of the market or any other reasons? If the market under the flyover is to be built, what measures will the Department take to attract hawkers and market tenants to bid the stalls there?
MR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN (in English):—Mr. Chairman, there are two supplementary questions. In regard to the first supplementary, I suggest that the detailed report would be made available to Mr. Ma so that it could be later examined in depth by the Select Committee but I would mention in passing that in July, the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee did set up a new Working Group on markets in general under the Chairmanship of my able colleague, Dr. Elsie Tu, and the first priority of this Working Group is the market situation in Sham Shui Po. For that reason, after that report has been seen in detail by Mr. MA and other interested members, perhaps the matter could be gone into further depth by Dr. Tu's Working Group.
MR. MA LEE-WO (in Cantonese):—In view of this, will the proposed market in Mei Foo be examined by the Working Group or dealt with separately? As far as I know, the Working Group on Provision of Marketing Facilities is looking at the overall adequacy of marketing facilities in various districts especially the redevelopment of Sham Shui Po Market. I wonder if the proposed Mei Foo Market will be studied by this Working Group or dealt with separately?
MR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN (in English):—I think that the Select Committee is quite flexible. This would be looked into further and matters of importance will always come to the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee for consideration. I might add for the information of Mr. MA that I spoke a few days ago to the Director of Urban Services who did tell me that he was going to pay a visit personally to study the market situation in Sham Shui Po together with other matters I presume. I know for certain that the question raised by Mr. Ma is very much in the minds of the Department itself and us as well.
MR. AMBROSE W. S. CHEUNG (in English):—I would like to briefly raise a couple of comments and ask a couple of questions on the reply given by the Chairman of the relevant Committee. The survey mentioned by the Chairman of the relevant Committee really is saying that they have done a survey asking market tenants and hawkers in Pei Ho Street, Sham Shui Po, regarding whether they think they would like to move away from that district and go into a district of two miles away into Mei Foo and work in a smaller size market miles away from the original district of business that they are doing. It is therefore not surprising that the result of the survey is not at all encouraging. And in my view, the survey is indeed worth a lot of reservation. I would like to ask two questions. The first question being: would the chairman please confirm whether there are two separate surveys apart from the one that we are talking about, one being conducted separately by a professionally independent market research company on the viability of the Mei Foo Market mainly focussing on the views of the Mei Foo residents as to the shopping habits and also trying to find data whether the shopping habits would support the viability of the market, that is the first survey. And in my
Page 53 of 166
97
97
Page 53 of 166
96
96
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
MR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN, CHAIRMAN OF THE MARKETS and Street TraDERS SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in English):-Mr. MA asks three questions relating to a proposal for a UC market in Mei Foo Sun Chuen under the Lai Chi Kok Flyover. Recalling a survey conducted earlier by the Department to ascertain the interest of hawkers in moving to such a new market, he asked for the survey results and whether solutions to environmental pollution and sewerage problems associated with such a market project have been found, and enquired when the Council would be further consulted on the project.
In response to Mr. MA's first question, an opinion survey by way of questionnaires for collating views from 73 Sham Shui Po Market tenants and 159 licensed wet goods hawkers in the vicinity of the Sham Shui Po Market, was conducted in November 1988. The purpose of the survey was to gather the views of the market tenants and hawkers on the viability of the proposed project, and, if a market is to be built at that site, whether there was sufficient interest from these hawkers to move their operations to the new market.
The results are as follows:
(a) 85% of the SSP Market tenants and 66% of the hawkers were not in
favour of the location of the market under the flyover;
(b) nearly all existing Sham Shui Po market tenants and 90% of the hawkers
surveyed indicated no interest in bidding for stalls; and
(c) there were mixed opinions on whether the proposed market would be
viable, with the consensus view doubting its viability.
In response to Mr. MA's second question, the Environmental Protection Department has been asked to advise on the environmental aspects of a market situated under a flyover. They have stated they have no fundamental objection to the siting of the market but cautioned the department on the problem of possible traffic dust disposition generated by diesel vehicles. They advise that the problem could be minimized by providing adequate covering to the market. Civil Engineering Services Department were consulted on the problem of drainage (not sewerage) and have advised that the existing storm water drains can be diverted to the drainage reserve and the foul water drainage system of the market connected to the nearest manhole for a cost of $375,000 i.e. a relatively small amount.
In response to Mr. Ma's third question, Architectural Services Department have completed a feasibility study on the project. The department is taking a final look at the proposed project with particular emphasis on its cost of construction and financial viability and it is hoped to forward a Committee Paper to Council within the next 2-3 months.
MR. MA LEE-Wo (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, according to the survey conducted by the Urban Services Department, the Sham Shui Po market tenants and the hawkers are not in favour of the location of the market under the flyover. Has the survey identified the causes why the proposed market is not acceptable
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
97
to them? Is it due to the limited scope of the market or any other reasons? If the market under the flyover is to be built, what measures will the Department take to attract hawkers and market tenants to bid the stalls there?
MR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN (in English):-Mr. Chairman, there are two supplementary questions. In regard to the first supplementary, I suggest that the detailed report would be made available to Mr. Ma so that it could be later examined in depth by the Select Committee but I would mention in passing that in July, the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee did set up a new Working Group on markets in general under the Chairmanship of my able colleague, Dr. Elsie Tu, and the first priority of this Working Group is the market situation in Sham Shui Po. For that reason, after that report has been seen in detail by Mr. MA and other interested members, perhaps the matter could be gone into further depth by Dr. Tu's Working Group.
MR. MA LEE-Wo (in Cantonese):-In view of this, will the proposed market in Mei Foo be examined by the Working Group or dealt with separately? As far as I know, the Working Group on Provision of Marketing Facilities is looking at the overall adequacy of marketing facilities in various districts especially the redevelopment of Sham Shui Po Market. I wonder if the proposed Mei Foo Market will be studied by this Working Group or dealt with separately?
MR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN (in English):--I think that the Select Committee is quite flexible. This would be looked into further and matters of importance will always come to the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee for consideration. I might add for the information of Mr. MA that I spoke a few days ago to the Director of Urban Services who did tell me that he was going to pay a visit personally to study the market situation in Sham Shui Po together with other matters I presume. I know for certain that the question raised by Mr. Ma is very much in the minds of the Department itself and us as well.
MR. AMBROSE W. S. CHEUNG (in English):-----I would like to brtiefly raise a couple of comments and ask a couple of questions on the reply given by the Chairman of the relevant Committee. The survey mentioned by the Chairman of the relevant Committee really is saying that they have done a survey asking market tenants and hawkers in Pei Ho Street, Sham Shui Po, regarding whether they think they would like to move away from that district and go into a district of two miles away into Mei Foo and work in a smaller size market miles away from the original district of business that they are doing. It is therefore not surprising that the result of the survey is not at all encouraging. And in my view, the survey is indeed worth a lot of reservation. I would like to ask two questions. The first question being: would the chairman please confirm whether there are two separate surveys apart from the one that we are talking about, one being conducted separately by a professionally independent market research company on the viability of the Mei Foo Market mainly focussing on the views of the Mei Foo residents as to the shopping habits and also trying to find datas whether the shopping habits would support the viability of the market, that is the first survey. And in my
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.