Tung Chung New Town Extension Study – Stage 2 Public Engagement

Planning Department and CEDD are preparing to expand Tung Chung.  But despite the existing popularity of cycling in the town, cycling and cycle tracks are downplayed.  (There are bike icons on the cover, and a mention of ‘cycle tracks along the waterfront promenade’, but nothing in the planning principles or other important parts of the document.)

We need to make sure that cycling is integrated into the heart of planning of new Tung Chung, to all destinations.  That includes roads and tracks that facilitate getting efficiently around the area by bike, parking (residential and spread across district).

First, see the Stage 1 study (you may need to use Internet Explorer to view it properly)

How to get involved, under the Stage 2 Public Engagement:

(1) ‘Community Workshop
22 June 2013 (Saturday), 2:00pm – 5:30pm (need to pre-register by 20 June)
Venue: HK Federation of Education Workers Wong Cho Bau Secondary School (map)

(2) ‘Public Forum’

13 July 2013 (Saturday), 2:00pm – 5:30pm (need to pre-register by 11 July)
Venue: HK Federation of Education Workers Wong Cho Bau Secondary School (map)

(It’s not clear what happens at these two events, or the difference between them)

(3) Make a written submission, either via their dull form (eg. ‘Do you want continuous walkways?’) with options to write your own answers;

OR just write to PlanD and CEDD, at:
skisdpo@pland.gov.hk and tungchung@cedd.gov.hk (deadline: 21 July – but do it now!)

Please email us at info@hkcyclingalliance.org if you’re going to a public meeting. If you write, please cc us.

You can phone them at:
PlanD: Sai Kung and Islands Districts Planning Office, 2158 6177 (fax: 2367 2976)
CEDD: HK Island and Islands Development Office, 2231 4408 (fax: 2577 5040)

The Stage One study

The Stage One study includes decorative icons and images of bikes, and mentions cycle tracks in the text.  But why isn’t cycling among the planning principles or the transport section, and why are there no details at all of the ‘cycle tracks’ – they’re not even shown on the map?  What are we being offered?

Cycling should be at the heart of the new Tung Chung, not merely window dressing.

Although the ‘cycling is leisure’ mantra is not trumpeted in this study, government is still very reluctant to recognise cycling as transport, let alone integrate it into planning.  So cycling is mentioned (even ‘commuting’, slightly), to look good, but actually left vague.   Without a firm commitment to build Tung Chung around cycling connectivity, we’ll end up with the same old disjointed, badly designed paths and no supporting effort to promote and enable functional cycling.

Don’t believe the pretty pictures; look at the text.

In the study’s 15 pages, here is what we get:

  • 海濱長廊及連綿的公園都會附設單車徑,以推廣單車成為區內的環保交通工具 Provide cycle tracks along the waterfront promenade and linear parks to promote cycling as a green commuting tool in Tung Chung

[what about cycling everywhere else? tracks can be good, and people cycle on roads and mixed-use area too.  So enable cycle traffic flow – no pointless barriers or dismount signs.  Encourage sensible sharing of space.  ]

  • 主要交通及社區設施附近提供足夠單車泊位以鼓勵居民使用單車 Provide adequate cycle parking space near major transport and community facilities to encourage cycling

[But people need to park at any locality, not just large bike parks at major facilities.  What about local parking near any shops or other places people go?  Eg. enable individual parking at most lampposts, signposts and railings.]


Share This :

After three years, Transport Department has casually put up on its website the ‘Nine Towns Study’ that it has been promising for so long:
Traffic and Transport Consultancy Study on Cycling Networks, Parking Facilities in Existing New Towns in Hong Kong

I’ve not had time to read it all yet, but, like the interim reports, the result seems underwhelming.  It only ever tried to look at cycle tracks and a few specific facilities in new towns, not general cycling on roads and the cycling environment as a whole.  Or planning ahead for New Development Areas.  And I note that the original scope has been cut, with no sign of the promised “conceptual improvement layout plan for each new town”.

On parking, it notes that there is not enough designated parking (that took three years to work out?) but the discussion quickly drops into TD’s favourite issue of what style of parking facility to buy, rather than, say, how to measure and determine where parking is necessary, especially small-scale distributed parking, away from the obvious MTR locations.  (Cyclehoop, anybody?)

The issue of poor connectivity of tracks is identified, which is good, but this problem will never be successfully addressed until we aim to maximise throughflow of bike traffic — as in, prioritising cyclists wherever possible, and certainly wherever bikes are the major flow.  No mention of that here.

The proposals, within this narrow remit, seem mostly small-scale and unimaginative.  So we have a three-year, multi-million-dollar report suggesting things like:

  • put up plastic bollards in place of steel – to reduce injury severity (already TD’s plan, when they should be removed entirely to .. er .. eliminate the injuries altogether);
  • paint markings to guide cyclists away from obstacles (just a stopgap: where are the planning guidelines for obstacle-free cycleways?);
  • paint track surface colours to show trunk and local routes (irrelevant if tracks are still used by commuters, wobblers, sports riders, and kids, with no policy consideration of who and what the tracks are for. Or real training.)
  • lots of soft padding on things in the way, such as newly erected poles carrying mirrors.
  • installing railings designed to make parking your bike harder (when it’s not even an offence to park a bike on a footway, central reserve, verge, hard shoulder etc, if no danger or actual obstruction is caused).

Of course, the study makes a number of valid points and raises genuine issues.  In particular, it presses for tracks to be connected at various places where currently there are gaps (and recognises that this will involve rebalancing some priorities). It also calls for the implementation of shared footpaths; improved signage and surface markings; cyclist access to leisure facilities (ie. everywhere managed by LCSD); and having Highways Dept staff cycle the tracks at night to determine lighting needs. Many specific problem locations on tracks are enumerated.

If the government, starting with TD, intends to act positively, the study could point towards some modest improvements for cyclists in the new towns.

However, in essence, by looking only at cycle tracks, with no assessment of wider transport policy, patterns of cycle journeys made, and aspirations among cyclists and potential cyclists, it was never going to offer a strategy for more effectively incorporating cycling into our communities.  Then by proposing largely what TD is already thinking (or has done!) – minor capital expenditure that tinkers with existing infrastructure, and no solid planning basis for avoiding the same mistakes in future – it falls sadly flat.

More detailed comment will follow.

You can read the report here:


Share This :

Whether or not you follow the progress of cycling in London, it is interesting that the city’s new ‘cycling commissioner’,  Andrew Gilligan, is being candid and constructive about where London’s bike environment is, and where it is going.

Of course, he recognises that attention must be paid to both segregated and on-road routes, and particularly he emphasises the need for designs that meet international best practice, criticising several schemes already in progress, which would be already heavenly in Hong Kong terms, in that they were implemented by an administration that believed in the contribution of cycling.  But the low position we start from here is an opportunity, right?

This post from ‘Cyclists in the City’ is recommended.

Share This :
方便推單車上落樓梯的斜道(星加坡)bicycle pullway in Singapore









Share This :

We have sent the first part of the long list of  locations that the cyclists of Hong Kong would like to see cycling unbanned. There’s more locations we will send later, but these will get the discussion started.

If you have more locations that you would like us to request for cycling to be unbanned, you can use this page to look at the locations we have so far and send us a location if it is not included already.

Ref Location
#1 Legco/Tamar Underpass legco-tamar
#2 IFC Underpass IFC underpass
#3 Hung Hom – Cheung Wan Road Hung Hom - Cheung Wan Road
#4 Fleming Road Fleming Road
#5 Marsh Road Marsh Road
#6 Connaught Road West (non-highway)  Connaught Road West
#7 Salisbury Road Salisbury Road
#8 Canton Road Canton Road
#9 Choi Hung Road Flyover Choi Hung Road Flyover
#10 Road from Ho Pui to Tai Lam <no photo available>
#11 High Island Reservoir, Sai Kung Sai Wan Rd <no photo available>
#12 Maclehose Section 10 <no photo available>
#13 Yuen Long Sewage Treatment Plant <no photo available>
#14 Brides Pool Road Brides Pool Road
#15 LCSD Central Waterfront <no photo available>
#16 Hung Hom Waterfront <no photo available>
#17 Shing Mun Country Park <no photo available>
#18 Cycle track adjacent to Caritas Lok Kan School <no photo available>
#19 Discovery Bay Tunnel Discovery bay Tunnel
#20 Tai Tam Reservoir Road Tai Tam Reservoir Road


Share This :









Share This :
We at Hong Kong Cycling Alliance are very proud to be a part of the first ever Hong Kong Bicycle Film Festival on 10th-13th January, and with the tickets on sale today, we’ll be rushing to get our seats booked..!
Cycling has recently become not just a trend but also a culture. The Bicycle Film Festival features a collection of independent film productions from around the globe, telling tales of joy and tears about cycling. The 2011 world tour drew an audience of over 300,000 from over 20 cities around the world. Held in Hong Kong this time, the festival coincides with the city’s post-Olympics cycling fever, opening up to the local community the infinite possibilities about cycling beyond the countryside cycling tracks.
Dialogue is mainly in English. Non English soundtracks will have English subtitles.
For Bicycle Film Festival’s 4-day programmes, including MovieExhibitionsFun Ride and Ticketing, please see BFF website HERE.
Share This :

The Road Safety Council recently changed its guidance regarding where cyclists should be in the roadspace. It now tells cyclists to be in the middle of any narrow lane (ie. when another vehicle cannot safely be alongside within the lane) or when you are approaching a turn.

On Hong Kong’s confined streets, this has many benefits: it makes you much more visible to drivers, gives you some space on your left when vehicles come too close, and ensures that drivers think before they overtake you rather than believing they can “just squeeze past” when you are nearer the kerb.

I saw this post on the fantastic bikeyface blog today and thought it was very appropriate:


Whenever a person first discovers I bike, they reply with a story. And it’s always the same story.

“I was driving down [insert any road name] when all of the sudden I saw a cyclist in the MIDDLE OF THE ROAD!”  Inevitably it always ends with them saying they “just tapped on their horn” or “squeezed by” or “yelled out to the cyclist.” 

And many many times I’ve been the cyclist in one of these stories – the one sharing the road with a driver that isn’t aware of the basic road rules regarding bikes.

What’s worse is that sometimes reasonable people panic at the sight of a bicycle in the lane… and then all that reason flies out the window.

Middle of the Road

So I wanted to explain it to those who have never biked in the city:

Middle of the Road

And there’s more. Bikes are small, but they still need space. Cars should give cyclists the same amount of space when passing as another vehicle, at least 3 ft. However, not all roads allow for that, particularly in Boston:

Middle of the Road

So don’t panic when you see a bike in your lane. Just treat it like another vehicle. If you can pass safely, that’s fine. If not, most likely you won’t be slowed down much if at all. In the city, I find that car traffic slows me down much more than the other way around.

Share This :



為宣揚香港渴求健康空氣的訊息,並鼓勵大眾多使用無空氣污染排放的交通工具,「健康空氣行動」(Clean Air Network )會於12月2日下午舉辦一個名為「綠悠遊 Clean Air Drive」的活動,活動集合一眾人士騎乘電動車、單車及其他零污染交通工具,由九龍灣零碳天地(九龍灣常悅道,MegaBox旁)出發,沿一條特別路線遊走,如果從高空向下望,該路線會畫出 A I R 三個英文大字,藉此宣揚香港渴求健康空氣的訊息。



Clean Air Drive event logo

Clean Air Drive event logo


Share This :

As Boulder edges out Portland for the title of North America’s most bike friendly city (in one ranking, anyway), and Amsterdam and Copenhagen jostle for the European cycling crown, we ask ourselves, how do Asia’s cities measure up for getting around on two wheels?

Beijing is the capital of the world’s most cycling-rich country, and still designed for bikes. Its cycling modal share may have dropped from 63% to 17% but could improve again soon – the city government aims to boost it to 23% by 2015.  Hangzhou has the world’s largest public bike share scheme, with an incredible 65,000 bikes at 2400 rental stations.  And Kunming is appreciated by those that ride there; it has a comfortable pace of life, and plenty of space.  Across the water, Kyoto is a functional cycling city with a dash of European style – it’s normal to ride everywhere around town, dressed for the destination, not the vehicle.

Taiwan is on everyone’s cycling radar these days: Taipei has a wonderful network of paths, and the Kaohsiung public bike share scheme is fab.  The city has 150 km of tracks and a lot of the back streets are free of road markings, so everyone drives gently and looks out for everyone else.  Even in Singapore, the government took the step that Hong Kong first needs to: publicly stating that cycling is transport, and then implementing measures to facilitate it.  They’ve been a bit quiet about it recently though.

Melbourne gets rated highly.  It’s flat and there’s a modest bike share scheme in the city centre. The 200+ km Around the Bay in a Day event draws the crowds and raises cycling’s profile. But Australia’s mandatory helmets law adds hassle for newcomers.  In fun places like Bali or Chiang Mai, cycling is widespread and effective, and certainly friendly, but it’s not quite urban cycling. 

One from the back pocket: three years ago, authorities in Seoul announced that the city would increase bicycle use from 1.6 percent to 10 percent by 2020. How are they doing?

What about Pyongyang?  The roads are blessedly free of cars (since no one can afford them) and 70% of North Korean households rely on their bikes to get around.  Plus, the new, young, just-possibly-normal leader, Kim Jong Un, recently rescinded the 16-year ban on women riding bikes (though it was introduced after the hit-and-run death of the daughter of a prominent general as she cycled in the capital).

And what does Hong Kong have to do to be a contender?  The administration’s negligent contribution is a handicap of course.  But huge numbers of people cycle anyway, for transport and enjoyment, and both the urban areas and countryside offer huge potential for getting around on two wheels. Shouldn’t enthusiastic and increasing participation count for us, or at least boost our chances for the future?  And will the government see the light some time soon?


Share This :