1993 — Page 48

Page 48 of 132

104

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

two types which are most popular, one is market and the other is amenity and recreational facilities. Concerning markets, a lot of them do not have enough parking facilities for lorries so that there are a lot of illegal parkings of lorries around the markets. This has created an insanitary environment and congested traffic condition in the vicinity. So for markets, we should provide more parking facilities for lorries. But more important is that we must provide the necessary manpower to manage and monitor the parking facilities. If we allow the lessees to park, load or unload within the parking spaces, then some of them may occupy the spaces for a long time and the others will be deprived of the necessary facilities. I do not agree that we should provide parking facilities for motorists to go to markets. In Clear Water Bay and other remote areas, such parking facilities have been provided. But for markets in urban areas, we cannot possibly provide parking spaces for people who drive cars to patronise the markets. We need parking spaces for lorries. As for cultural and recreational facilities, there is a need for some parking facilities. But if the venues are in the vicinity of say MTR and other public transport network, then parking facilities are not necessarily required. In order to spread the message of environmental protection, we should encourage people to make use of public transport. If you want to exercise yourself, you should take public transport to arrive at our venues. If the venues are very close to public transport network, there is no such a great demand for carpark facilities. If we are to alleviate the parking problem in the urban areas or to generate revenue through provision of parking facilities, then that is another matter. Whether we should adopt it as a policy will be an interesting one, I am not against the idea. But for those conveniently located venues, I do not think we should provide too many car parking facilities. But for those in far away locations, I agree that we should provide more car parking facilities so as to boost utilisation rate and to provide convenience to members of the public. Mr. Chairman, I do not know whether I have addressed the issue directly but for markets, I want to see more parking facilities for lorries. As for other cultural and recreational facilities I am divided as to whether we should provide more car parking facilities.

MR. AMBROSE CHEUNG WING-SUM (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I have not signed up to speak, but having listened to the views of other Members, I would like to raise a few points. Concerning today's motion, in principle I support the idea that as far as practicable, a limited number of parking spaces should be provided at UC venues. The main objective is to provide convenience to people using our facilities and venues, and so I support this principle. But then we must be very careful in our selection of venues to provide these facilities. Some colleagues have pointed out some venues are of a regional nature, that is to say that we hope that members of the public from different districts can use that venue. The catchment area is large, and so for those venues, it is right to provide parking facilities for the patrons. But then for some facilities which are of a local nature, and usually serve the residents in the vicinity, basically parking spaces are not necessary. And also in view of this principle, I think we should look at the objectives of providing UC venues which are to encourage

Page 48 of 132

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Page 48 of 132

105

the general public to use our venues. It is true that the standard of living of our community is on the rise, yet we are not providing club type facilities. For venues which are easily accessible and are conveniently located, I have reservations about providing parking facilities at those venues. In this motion, there are two more reasons for supporting the provision of parking facilities and I have reservations about these two reasons. Firstly, to alleviate the parking problem in the urban areas. I think this is a comparison of quantity and quality. Provision of parking facilities at UC venues to alleviate the territorial shortfall in parking spaces is not a solution because there will not be enough parking spaces to alleviate the problem. Secondly, to make optimum use of land resources. This is also very controversial. If you have land, do you want to provide more facilities for public to enjoy or do you want to provide more parking spaces? This is a matter of priority. So in this motion, I support the principle mentioned in the first two lines of the motion. But then concerning the following two reasons given in the motion, I have reservations about them. Generally speaking, I think that the Urban Council should actively consider providing parking spaces for the public at suitable venues. Mr. Chairman, with these remarks, I support the motion.

MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, for some UC venues, we certainly need parking spaces for loading and unloading of passengers. I have reservations on provision of parking facilities on a long time basis. In parks, games halls or our central libraries, provision of car parking facilities for loading and unloading of vehicles for a short period of time is necessary. For games halls and sports grounds, especially the future Siu Sai Wan Sports Ground, if a school hires that venue, students will take coaches to the destination. If no parking spaces are available, the schools or organisation concerned will be greatly inconvenienced. Many groups or organisations take coaches to parks for organized trips. If we can provide parking facilities for these tours, that will provide convenience to those people. If we are to provide parking facilities similar to other carparks, then I have reservations because firstly this is not within our jurisdiction to provide carparks. Unless the Transport Department or the Central Government has agreed to hand back all carparks to the UC for management. In the past, management of carpark was one of our work. Later it was returned to Central Government and subsequently to Transport Department. If we are to provide carparks, we should consider taking over all the responsibility for carpark management, otherwise we might not do it. We must first have the consent of the Transport Department because we must consider whether we can determine the fee to be charged by ourselves. If we are to build carparks which are managed by others, this is not worthy of consideration. If the Transport Department is interested in providing carparking facilities in our venues, then I am happy with this. But whether the Transport Department is willing to do this is another matter. The broad principle mentioned in the motion to provide suitable parking facilities has my support but I have reservations on a detailed analysis. But any way I support the motion.

Page 48 of 132