We need to consider alternative proposals and seek out the one that provides the community with the biggest net benefits.
The government proposal is too costly. Any accessibility gains achieved over the ProCommons’ scheme appear overwhelmed by the much higher cost. And even those accessibility gains have yet to be demonstrated.
I agree that a terminus in the downtown area is not necessarily more accessible. Much depends on the access links.
A terminus in Kam Sheung Road has the added advantage that it may well enhance the utilization rates of some of the other existing railway links and improve land use.
It is better NOT to build the 新高鐵 (high speed-railway) terminus at the CBD.
My reasons :
1. It is much costly for the construction and on-going operation.
2. 新高鐵 (high speed-railway) is an inter-city system, should not be situated in the CBD, much safer to be situated outside the city-centre.
3. An exchange (terminals of the high speed-railway and in-town transports) at the city boundary may develop another sub-CBD at the out-skirt of the city ( or CBD).
Besides these, I very much wish the government to disclose more about their plan and proposal of locating the proposed terminus at western kowloon and the proposed railway route.
The high speed trains are almost like regular flights of flying objects. I think that will be very dangerous to let the high-speed long trains to be running in the city!!!
I support the new proposal. I think our Government should build the high speed-railway in a sensible way. The high speed-railway should be convenient to most of the users. And now, the high speed-railway consultant group has found a better route and less costly way to build this high speed-railway. Our Government should listen and reconsider their proposal.
Better Rail For Hong Kong/更佳鐵路為香港 
I find the ProCommons’ proposal very sensible.
We need to consider alternative proposals and seek out the one that provides the community with the biggest net benefits.
The government proposal is too costly. Any accessibility gains achieved over the ProCommons’ scheme appear overwhelmed by the much higher cost. And even those accessibility gains have yet to be demonstrated.
I agree that a terminus in the downtown area is not necessarily more accessible. Much depends on the access links.
A terminus in Kam Sheung Road has the added advantage that it may well enhance the utilization rates of some of the other existing railway links and improve land use.
It is better NOT to build the 新高鐵 (high speed-railway) terminus at the CBD.
My reasons :
1. It is much costly for the construction and on-going operation.
2. 新高鐵 (high speed-railway) is an inter-city system, should not be situated in the CBD, much safer to be situated outside the city-centre.
3. An exchange (terminals of the high speed-railway and in-town transports) at the city boundary may develop another sub-CBD at the out-skirt of the city ( or CBD).
Besides these, I very much wish the government to disclose more about their plan and proposal of locating the proposed terminus at western kowloon and the proposed railway route.
The high speed trains are almost like regular flights of flying objects. I think that will be very dangerous to let the high-speed long trains to be running in the city!!!
I support the new proposal. I think our Government should build the high speed-railway in a sensible way. The high speed-railway should be convenient to most of the users. And now, the high speed-railway consultant group has found a better route and less costly way to build this high speed-railway. Our Government should listen and reconsider their proposal.