Page 87 of 166
163
162
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCILMR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN (in English):—Mr. Chairman, I did say that the percentage covers usage. To what extent the stalls are used for sale of goods or for storage, I think this is the right and privilege of the stall holders themselves. But as far as the Department and the Council are concerned, this is the occupancy rate.
MR. PETER C. K. CHAN (in English):—Mr. Chairman, actually, it is the same point raised by Mr. BERNACCHI, I think when we come to the viability, that is to say, the answer gives light on whether people have a trade there, that is viable. If it is used as 'store' instead of 'stall', that is in a way misleading. I think from the answer, we understand that unless Mr. CHEONG-LEEN says no or the fact says no. Is it a fact that quite a lot of people pay the rent, call themselves occupants and trade along the edge and cause a lot of obstruction? If that is the case, that should be the answer given to the Council. I don't know whether Mr. CHEONG-LEEN would like to confirm it or not?
MR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN (in English):—I think the crux of Dr. Tu's question has to do with the ground floor on the western side. Mr. BERNACCHI's question has to do with the usage of the stall holders who are occupying the stalls within the market. So it is two separate issues, Mr. Chairman.
MR. PETER C. K. CHAN (in English):—I don't think my question was answered. Would it be a case that some of those occupants pay the rent and use the 'stall' as a 'store' and then trade outside? Is it the case? It is either yes or no or I don't know.
MR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN (in English):—Mr. Chairman, as I said, it is entirely the privilege of the stall holders. Some of them would like to use them as storage purposes and some of them would like to use them as trading places. And as far as the Department is concerned, they have been rented out and the Department does not wish to interfere with what purposes the stall holders wish to use their individual stalls.
9.
MR. JOHN WU MAN-KEUNG asked the following question (in Cantonese):—The Refuse Collection Point in Battery Street of Yau Tsim District is located in a densely-populated residential area. The exhaust outlet on the roof of the RCP is lower than the level of the buildings nearby and residents in the vicinity complain that bad smell is often emitted from the RCP. Moreover, in the early morning, cleansing workers have to queue up and push handcarts of refuse onto the pavement. They must pass a narrow back lane before they can reach the rear door of the RCP for dumping of the refuse. The above working process causes much nuisance to the residents in the neighbourhood.
(i) Although air filters are being used in the Refuse Collection Point, a bad smell is often emitted from the RCP. How can this problem be completely solved?
(ii) What can be done to avoid the nuisance caused to the residents during the process of dumping of refuse by the cleansing workers?
(iii) It is inappropriate to set up the RCP in a densely-populated area. May I know whether the RCP can be moved to somewhere else and the original site be converted to other uses?
THE PUBLIC HEALTH SELECT COMMITTEE, MR. TONG KAM-BIU, VICE-CHAIRMAN, replied as follows (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, this question concerns the emission of smell from the Battery Street RCP, the nuisance caused by private refuse collectors at the rear lane of the RCP, and the feasibility of resiting the RCP.
The Battery Street RCP, which started operation in December 1986, is a major off-street RCP serving the catchment area bounded by Kansu Street, Ferry Street, Jordan Road, and Shanghai Street. Due to site constraint, it was built between two tenement buildings. To minimize nuisances, up-to-date facilities have been incorporated in this RCP, including an activated carbon filtration system, a vehicle exhaust system, and air curtains. These installations should reduce smell nuisance to a minimum, but a certain degree of smell in connection with the refuse collection process is unavoidable. The Department will monitor the situation closely and ensure that minimal nuisance is caused to the neighbourhood of the RCP.
As regards the nuisance created by private refuse collectors, they have been advised that their refuse should be covered properly or placed in plastic bags during conveyance to the RCP. After each session of refuse collection, the RCP and the rear lane are hosed down, disinfected, and deodorized.
The Battery Street RCP is open from 7:00 a.m. to 11:30 p.m. and collects about 18 tonnes of refuse and junk every day. Unless and until a suitable alternative site within the catchment area is identified, relocating it elsewhere is not possible. It should be noted that an RCP is a necessary evil. Relocating it elsewhere is only shifting the problem and not solving it.
(Mr. Ambrose CHEUNG Wing-sum left the meeting at 3:25 p.m.)
MR. JOHN WU MAN-KEUNG (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I have two supplementary questions. The RCP is installed with the activated carbon filtration system. Could I ask whether the activated carbon filter is replaced regularly and how regularly is it replaced? Secondly, the RCP in Battery Street is about the height of a three-storey building and is built between two tenement buildings. On the roof of this RCP, there is an exhaust outlet, which is less than 10 feet. Besides, it is only about a few feet away from the nearby residential buildings. Could the height of the outlet be increased, so that it can be higher than the roof of the nearby buildings or perhaps could it be resited elsewhere?
MR. TONG KAM-BIU (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, generally speaking, the activated carbon filters are replaced every six months. In the case of the RCP...
Page 87 of 166
163
162
Page 87 of 166
Page 87 of 166
163
162
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
MR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN (in English):-Mr. Chairman, I did say that the percentage covers usage. To what extent the stalls are used for sale of goods or for storage, I think this is the right and privilege of the stall holders themselves. But as far as the Department and the Council are concerned, this is the occupancy rate.
MR. PETER C. K. CHAN (in English):—Mr. Chairman, actually, it is the same point raised by Mr. BERNACCHI, I think when we come to the viability, that is to say, the answer give light on whether people have a trade there, that is viable. If it is used as 'store' instead of ‘stall', that is in the way misleading. I think from the answer, we understand that unless Mr. CHEONG-LEEN says no or the fact says no. Is it a fact that quite a lot of people pay the rent, called himself occupant and trade along the edge and causing a lot of obstruction. If that is the case, that should be the answer given to the Council. I don't know whether Mr. CHeong-leen would like to confirm it or not?
MR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN (in English):---I think the crux of Dr. Tu's question has to do with the ground floor on the western side. Mr. BERNACCHI's question has to do with the usage of the stall holders who are occupying the stalls within the market. So it is two separate issues, Mr. Chairman.
MR. PETER C. K. CHAN (in English):--I don't think my question was answered. Would it be a case that some of those occupants pay the rent and use the ‘stall' as a 'store' and then trade outside. Is it the case? It is either yes or no or I don't know.
MR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN (in English):—Mr. Chairman, as I said, it is entirely the privilege of the stall holders. Some of them would like to use them as storage purposes and some of them would like to use them as trading places. And as far as the Department is concerned, they have been rented out and the Department does not wish to interfere on what purposes the stall holders wish to use their individual stalls.
9.
MR. JOHN WU MAN-KEUNG asked the following question (in Cantonese):--- The Refuse Collection Point in Battery Street of Yau Tsim District is located in a densely-populated residential area. The exhaust outlet on the roof of the RCP is lower than the level of the buildings nearby and residents in the vicinity complain that bad smell is often emitted from the RCP. Moreover, in the early morning, cleansing workers have to queue up and push handcarts of refuse onto the pavement. They must pass a narrow back lane before they can reach the rear door of the RCP for dumping of the refuse. The above working process causes much nuisance to the residents in the neighbourhood.
(i) Although air filters are being used in the Refuse Collection Point, a bad smell
is often emitted from the RCP. How can this problem be completely solved?
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
(ii) What can be done to avoid the nuisance caused to the residents during the
process of dumping of refuse by the cleansing workers?
(iii) It is inappropriate to set up the RCP in a densely-populated area. May I know whether the RCP can be moved to somewhere else and the original site be converted to other uses?
THE PUBLIC HEALTH SELECT MR. TONG KAM-BIU, VICE-CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, this question concerns the emission of smell from the Battery Street RCP, the nuisance caused by private refuse collectors at the rear lane of the RCP, and the feasibility of resiting the RCP.
The Battery Street RCP, which started operation in December 1986, is a major off-street RCP serving the catchment area bounded by Kansu Street, Ferry Street, Jordan Road and Shanghai Street. Due to site constraint, it was built between two tenement buildings. To minimize nuisances, up-to-date facilities have been incorporated in this RCP, including an activated carbon filtration system, a vehicle exhaust system and air curtains. These installations should reduce smell nuisance to a minimum, but a certain degree of smell in connection with the refuse collection process is unavoidable. The Department will monitor the situation closely and ensure that minimal nuisance is caused to the neighbourhood of the RCP.
As regards the nuisance created by private refuse collectors, they have been advised that their refuse should be covered properly or placed in plastic bags during conveyance to the RCP. After each session of refuse collection, the RCP and the rear lane are hosed down, disinfected and deodorized.
The Battery Street RCP is open from 7.00 a.m. to 11.30 p.m. and collects about 18 tonnes of refuse and junk every day. Unless and until a suitable alternative site within the catchment area is identified, relocating it elsewhere is not possible. It should be noted that an RCP is a necessary evil. Relocating it elsewhere is only shifting the problem and not solving it.
(Mr. Ambrose CHEUNG Wing-sum left the meeting at 3.25 p.m.)
MR. JOHN WU MAN-KEUNG (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, I have two supplementary questions. The RCP is installed with the activated carbon filtration system. Could I ask whether the activated carbon filter is replaced regularly and how regularly is it replaced? Secondly, the RCP in Battery Street is about the height of a three storey building and is built between two tenement buildings. On the roof of this RCP, there is an exhaust outlet, which is less than 10 feet. Besides, it is only about a few feet away from the nearby residential buildings. Could the height of the outlet be increased, so that it can be higher than the roof of the nearby buildings or perhaps could it be resited elsewhere?
MR. TONG KAM-BIU (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, generally speaking, the activated carbon filters are replaced every six months. In the case of the RCP
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.