民主黨消息: 深灣將開辦往來銅鑼灣通宵小巴

來源: 徐遠華 - 深灣、黃竹坑網上辦公室
專線小巴4C的營辦商(進智公交)現已向運輸署申請開辦新通宵小巴4X, 往來深灣雅濤閣至銅鑼灣(景隆街)
服務時間: 0000-0600
班次: 20分鐘一班
全程收費: $8.00

據徐遠華指出, 是因為收到深灣居民投訴, 4C的通宵班次不時發生司機不駛入黃竹坑邨, 導致居民要在黃竹坑道下車步行前往, 更發生中途遭歹徒打劫的事件, 因此向運輸署及小巴公司要求4C通宵班次繞經深灣, 後收到小巴公司回覆, 謂已向運輸署申請開辦深灣至銅鑼灣的通宵小巴服務, 預計兩個月內可以落實.

Ref: http://hk.myblog.yahoo.com/kevin-wch/article?mid=814

以往安排係N4A, N4C往香港仔方向都會經黃竹坑(警校道、南朗山道)
但好似自N4A延長至莊士敦道尾之後
就變成無0左呢個安排

4X呢個編號應該唔會加"N"字變成N4X
因為日間唔會有呢條線服務

運吉否決左個4X  喇

Ref: http://wongchoilap.com

Stop Route 4X (N4X) because of low ridership!

However, let Routes N4A or N4C to detour to serve Sham Wan residents is more possible substitute plan because there is one of the possible reasons: public transport can provide better security to the residents.  According to the news, some residents were robbed when they went home. (*10).

Therefore, if the green mini-bus can serve the communities even there is a few residents who live, it is a good idea.

Unfortunately, as we have discussed before, there is low ridership in Sham Wan.  Therefore, operating a new route is not a good idea.  However, using old routes to detour can improve the service, it is the only solution that is possible in the real world.  We are looking forward to hearing good news from Transport Department.

The situation in the real world is complicated, and this makes not every solution is the best.   We should find the best solution to solve the real world problem.



[ 本帖最後由 hp7629 於 2007-11-10 15:25 編輯 ]

原帖由 KD4112@107 於 2007-11-10 13:32 發表
運吉否決左個4X  喇

Ref: http://wongchoilap.com

通宵車都否決....

一句「低載客量」就可以否決4X
運輸局亦未免太過武斷...

(如果真係呢句0野就可以否決 咁以往0既"拍烏蠅綠小又點解批
↑最佳例子：新界612/P)


如果要諗替代方法 就唯有靠N4A/N4C─N59A GGI(綠小轉乘)

民主黨的徐遠華（黃竹坑選區候選人）已知悉此事。他表示，在今年10月24日再與該署開會跟進深灣交通問題時，該署代表表示，將認真研究小巴公司的建議，並在明年約1月份區議會的道路發展計劃(RDP)會議內討論。

他將會去信運輸署，提出以下質詢：

1.　為何 貴會對該候選人（姓黃的候選人）的答覆內容，與他本人今年10月24日與 貴處開會時的完全不同?
2.　為何 貴會未經區議會討論，就斷然拒絕小巴公司的申請? 他本人反對這種既漠視深灣居民權益，又不尊重議會的做法和決定。

P.S.: solution:

The geen mini-bus/ van Route of New Territories 612/P is operated to let residents transfer to West Rail.  However, there is very low rideship after the route starts.   The information is just from news, I am not sure if it is correct or not.  Finally, the route 612/P has been cancelled.

Return to the topic, GGI (green minibus- green minibus interchange) is one of the possible plan to discuss.

The Transport Department doesn't like the route 4X (N4X) to operate because of the low ridership.    Furthermore, there are also political arguments that we do not know.

原帖由 hp7629 於 2007-11-12 11:44 發表
The geen mini-bus/ van Route of New Territories 612/P is operated to let residents transfer to West Rail.  However, there is very low rideship after the route starts.   The information is just from news, I am not sure if it is correct or not.  Finally, the route 612/P has been cancelled.

Return to the topic, GGI (green minibus- green minibus interchange) is one of the possible plan to discuss.

The Transport Department doesn't like the route 4X (N4X) to operate because of the low ridership.    Furthermore, there are also political arguments that we do not know.

The case is more complex than you thought.

612/612P belonged to a special group of GMB, named " Premium GMB Service for Residental Estates " and according to the tender, GMB operator must have special arrangement on Estate tenants (e.g. GMB can directly enter the Estate Restricted Area for boarding and alighting, and/or tenants have priority to enjoy the GMB service). In this case this is Yoho Town.

Due to this arrangement, non-Yoho Town residents taking this route must alight outside the Estate Gate and this leads to quarrel on the matter of residents and non-residents. Besides, Yoho Town has not been fully occupied with tenants. These two reasons consititutes low ridership on 612/612P, and the same case also happened on 611/611P (Parcville)

I have heard that there are cases where non-Yoho Town Residents are not allowed to take 612/612P.

Going back to 4X, the route is still under progress of applicaton and how do you think the ridership is low? The problem is TD totally ignored District Board during the period of 2007 District Board Election, as TD has promised Democratic Party that discussion will be made on 2008 Jan DB Meeting.

Solution:

First, thanks for your explanation about the route 611/P and 612/P.  In fact, I am not sure about the history of these routes.

Second, why can I say that there is low ridership about route 4X (N4X)?  The term "low ridership" is relatively speaking, not absolutely speaking.  Using the logic, I can say this because I beleive that the ridership in owl time (0100 - 0500) is lower than that of other times.  

However, in fact, I do not have the real statical information; otherwise, we can use mathematical method to test this statement.  So, could you provide information?

Third, assume that your explanation in the second part listed in #9 is complete.  Nevertheless, I beleive that general publics do not understand too much information what is wrong between the District Board and the Transport Department.  No matter what, according to the limited information that we know, I beleive that there must be political argument between these two groups discuss above (DB and TD).