7
Construction Dust Impact Assessment
This chapter
presents the findings of the assessment of construction dust implications
arising from the Project during the construction phase. All above-ground works areas
with potential dust emission activities have been examined and their impacts
assessed. With the implementation of on-site watering, potential environmental
impacts associated with construction dust would be controlled to acceptable
levels.
For the criteria as regards air
quality impact assessment, reference shall be made to the Hong Kong Planning
Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG), the Air Pollution Control Ordinance (APCO)
(Cap.311), and Annex 4 of the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact
Assessment Process (TM-EIAO).
The APCO (Cap.311) provides the
power for controlling air pollutants from a variety of stationary and mobile
sources and encompasses a number of Air Quality Objectives (AQOs). In addition
to the APCO, the following overall policy objectives are laid down in Chapter 9
of the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG) as follows:
a) Limit the contamination of the air
in
b) Ensure that the AQO for 7 common air
pollutants are met as soon as possible.
Currently, the AQOs stipulate limits
on concentrations for 7 pollutants including sulphur dioxide (SO2),
Total Suspended Particulates (TSP), Respirable Suspended Particulates (RSP),
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Carbon Monoxide (CO), photochemical
oxidants, and Lead (Pb). The AQOs are
listed in the table below.
Table 7.1: Hong Kong Air Quality Objectives (HKAQO)
|
|
Limits on Concentration, ug/m3
[1] (ppm in brackets) |
||||
|
Pollutant |
1-hr [2] |
8-hr [3] |
24-hr [3] |
3-Month [4] |
Annual [4] |
|
|
800 (0.3) |
|
350 (0.13) |
|
80 (0.03) |
|
Total
Suspended Particulates |
500 [7] |
|
260 |
|
80 |
|
Respirable
Suspended Particulates [5] |
|
|
180 |
|
55 |
|
Carbon
Monoxide |
30,000 (26.2) |
10,000 (8.7) |
|
|
|
|
Nitrogen
Dioxide |
300 (0.16) |
|
150 (0.08) |
|
80 (0.04) |
|
Photochemical
Oxidants (as ozone) [6] |
240 |
|
|
|
|
|
Lead |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
Notes:
[1] Measured at
298K and 101.325 kPa.
[2] Not to be
exceeded more than three times per year.
[3] Not to be
exceeded more than once per year.
[4] Arithmetic
mean.
[5] Respirable suspended
particulates means suspended particulates in air with a nominal aerodynamic
diameter of 10 micrometres or smaller.
[6] Photochemical
oxidants are determined by measurement of ozone only.
[7] Not an AQO
but is a criterion for evaluating air quality impacts as stated in Annex 4 of
TM-EIAO.
The key air
emission source from Project is the dust generated during construction phase at
above-ground works areas. In this regard, air pollutant of concern would only
include total suspended particulates (TSP) which has been assessed in this
study. The dust emissions generated
during grouting, bored tunnelling and drill-and-blast activities would be
insignificant.
Existing Air
Sensitive Receivers (ASRs) in the vicinity of the project include various
residential developments, educational institution etc (see Section 7.4). Key existing air pollution sources that may bear upon
the air quality at Project at construction phase including work sites demarcated
for construction and railway works, barging facilities and haul roads located
nearby. Details of air pollution emission sources are discussed in Section 7.5.
Historical air quality monitoring
data from the monitoring stations, namely the Tsuen Wan, Kwai Chung, Sham Shui
Po, Kwun Tong, and Central/Western Monitoring stations operated by EPD, have
been examined. The latest air quality
monitoring data from 2006 to 2010 at these monitoring stations are tabulated in
the table below. In order to determine the meaningful background air quality,
the latest 5-year annual average would be adopted.
Table 7.2: TSP Monitoring
Data in 2006-2010
|
Monitoring Station |
Annual TSP Concentration
(ug/m3) |
|||||
|
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
5-year Average |
|
|
Tsuen
Wan |
82 |
79 |
67 |
63 |
63 |
70.8 (89%) |
|
Kwai
Chung |
81 |
85 |
79 |
70 |
71 |
77.2 (96%) |
|
Sham
Shui Po |
79 |
79 |
81 |
77 |
76 |
78.4 (97%) |
|
Kwun
Tong |
75 |
82 |
72 |
70 |
67 |
73.2 (92%) |
|
Central/
Western |
78 |
77 |
78 |
73 |
76 |
76.4 (96%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average: |
75.2 (94%) |
Note:
% of AQO is provided in the bracket.
Monitoring results exceeded AQO are shown as bolded
characters.
The existing environment of the
study area in
Construction of the project will
involve the emission of fugitive dusts and hence TSP has to be assessed for
construction phase air quality impact. During the operational phase, only
electrified trains would be operated and hence there will not be air quality
emission.
7.4.1 Air Sensitive Receivers
With reference to EIA Study Brief
No. ESB-233/2011 for Project, the study area for air quality impact assessment
should generally be defined by a distance of 500m from the boundary of Project
Site. Further, it should be extended to
include major emission sources that may have a bearing on the environmental
acceptability of the project. The study
will also review the air quality impacts on the areas and other sensitive
receivers beyond 500m from the Project site boundary, which may be potentially
affected by the Project.
In accordance with Annex 12 of the
TM-EIAO, Air Sensitive Receivers (ASRs) include domestic premises, hotel,
hostel, hospital, clinic, nursery, temporary housing accommodation, school,
educational institution, office, factory, shop, shopping centre, place of
public worship, library, court of law, sports stadium or performing arts
centre. Any other premises or places with which, in terms of duration or number
of people affected, has a similar sensitivity to the air pollutants as the
aforelisted premises and places would also be considered as a sensitive
receiver. Representative ASRs within a distance of 500m from the alignment,
temporary work areas, and associated barging facilities have been identified.
These ASRs include both the existing
and planned developments. Existing ASRs are identified by means of reviewing
topographic maps, aerial photos, land status plans, supplemented by site
inspections. They mainly include developed residential buildings with different
storey high, educational institution of few storey high and hotels etc.
Planned/committed ASRs are identified
by making reference to relevant Outline Zoning Plans (OZP), Outline Development
Plans, Layout Plans and other published plans in the vicinity of the alignment,
including:
·
Approved
Tsim Sha Tsui (KPA 1) Outline Zoning Plan (No. S/K1/26);
·
Draft
Yau Ma Tei (KPA 2) Outline Zoning Plan (No. S/K2/21);
·
Draft
Ho Man Tin (KPA 6&7) Outline Zoning Plan (No. S/K7/21);
·
Approved
Wang Tau Hom & Tung Tau (KPA 8) Outline Zoning Plan (No. S/K8/21)
·
Approved
Hung Hom (KPA 9) Outline Zoning Plan (No. S/K9/24);
·
Approved
Tsz Wan Shan, Diamond Hill & San Po Kong (KPA 11) Outline Zoning Plan (No.
S/K11/25);
·
Draft
Kai Tak (KPA22) Outline Zoning Plan (No. S/K22/3)
The relevant
stakeholders were also approached to obtain latest information on planning
application, layout and building height.
The major planned uses in the vicinity of the area include:
·
Kai Tak Further Development
proposed in Agreement No. CE35/2006 (CE) Kai Tak Development Engineering Study cum
Design and Construction of Advance Works – Investigation, Design and
Construction
(Approved EIA Report: EIA-157/2008)
The locations of the representative
ASRs for air quality assessment during the construction of the project are
illustrated in Figures 7.1.1 to 7.1.3, and are summarised in
the table below. Detailed information of representative ASRs are presented in Appendix 7.1.
Table 7.3: Representative air sensitive receivers
|
ASR ID |
Location |
Landuse [1] |
No. of Storey |
Approximate separation distance
from project site boundary (m) |
|
DIH-5 |
Residential Premises along |
|||
|
DIH-5-1 |
Rainbow
Home |
R |
11 |
70 |
|
DIH-5-2 |
Residential
premises |
R |
6 |
70 |
|
DIH-5-5 |
Our
Lady’s Kindergarten |
E |
2 |
60 |
|
DIH-6 |
Wong Tai Sin Fire Station and
Quarters |
|||
|
DIH
6-1 |
Wong
Tai Sin Fire Station and Quarters Block A |
R |
34 |
100 |
|
DIH-7 |
|
|||
|
DIH-7-1 |
|
R |
25 |
190 |
|
DIH-7-2 |
|
R |
25 |
190 |
|
DIH-8 |
|
|||
|
DIH-8-1 |
|
W |
3 |
130 |
|
DIH-9 |
Shek On Building |
|||
|
DIH-9-1 |
Shek
On Building |
E + W |
5 |
30 |
|
DIH-10 |
Hong Kong Sheung Hui Nursing Home |
|||
|
DIH-10-1 |
Hong
Kong Sheung Keung Hui Nursing Home |
H |
9 |
30 |
|
DIH-11 |
Lung |
|||
|
DIH-11-1 |
Lung
|
R |
34 |
<10 |
|
DIH-12 |
Galaxia |
|||
|
DIH-12-1 |
Galaxia
Tower B |
R |
44 |
100 |
|
DIH-12-2 |
Galaxia Tower E |
R |
43 |
40 |
|
DIH-13 |
|
|||
|
DIH-13-1 |
|
E |
5 |
80 |
|
DIH-14 |
|
|||
|
DIH-14-1 |
|
R |
22 |
<10 |
|
DIH-14-2 |
|
R |
22 |
<10 |
|
DIH-14-3 |
|
R |
22 |
110 |
|
DIH-14-4 |
|
E |
6 |
90 |
|
DIH-14-5 |
|
R |
22 |
<10 |
|
DIH-14-6 |
|
R |
22 |
<10 |
|
DIH-15 |
Choi Hung Estate |
|||
|
DIH-15-1 |
Choi Hung Estate - Kam Wan House |
R |
20 |
100 |
|
DIH-15-2 |
Choi
Hung Estate - Pik Hoi House |
R |
20 |
100 |
|
DIH-17 |
Chuk Yuen United Village |
|||
|
DIH-17-1 |
Chuk
Yuen United Village |
R |
1-3 |
60 |
|
DIH-25 |
|
|||
|
DIH-25-1 |
Football
Field in |
GIC |
- |
80 |
|
DIH-26 |
|
|||
|
DIH-26-1 |
|
GIC |
- |
270 |
|
KAT-1 |
|
|||
|
KAT-1-1 |
|
E |
5 |
210 |
|
HOM-3 |
Residential Premises along Shun |
|||
|
HOM-3-1 |
|
R |
18 |
240 |
|
HOM-3-2 |
|
R |
20 |
280 |
|
HOM-4 |
Residential Premises along |
|||
|
HOM-4-1 |
Yee
Fu Building |
R |
25 |
170 |
|
HOM-5 |
|
|||
|
HOM-5-1 |
|
R |
5 |
110 |
|
HUH-1 |
Residential Premises and Educational
Institution along |
|||
|
HUH-1-1 |
|
E |
8 |
60 |
|
HUH-1-2 |
Lok
Ka House |
R |
7 |
20 |
|
HUH-1-3 |
|
R |
8 |
<10 |
|
HUH-2 |
The |
|||
|
HUH-2-1 |
|
E |
6 |
100 |
|
HUH-3 |
Residential Premises along Shun |
|||
|
HUH-3-1 |
|
R |
42 |
140 |
|
HUH-4 |
The Metropolis Residence |
|||
|
HUH-4-1 |
The
|
R |
18 |
130 |
|
HUH-5 |
|
|||
|
HUH-5-1 |
|
R |
11 |
90 |
|
HUH-6 |
HK |
|||
|
HUH-6-1 |
HK
|
GIC |
13 |
90 |
|
HUH-7 |
Hotel Nikko |
|||
|
HUH-7-1 |
Hotel
Nikko |
R |
12 |
100 |
|
HUH-9 |
|
|||
|
HUH-9-1 |
|
P |
1 |
<10 |
|
HUH-10 |
Harbourfront Horizon |
|||
|
HUH-10-1 |
Harbourfront
Horizon |
R |
22 |
240 |
|
HUH-11 |
|
|||
|
HUH-11-1 |
|
I |
- |
30 |
Note:
[1] R–
residential; E – educational; I – Industrial; H – clinic/ home for the aged; W
– worship; GIC – government, institution and community; P – performing arts centres
Table 7.4: Planned ASRs
|
ASR ID |
Location |
Landuse [1] |
No. of
Storey |
|
KAT-P1 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
||
|
KAT-P1-1 |
Residential
premises near Kai Tak Station |
R |
[3] |
|
KAT-P1-2 |
Residential
premises near Kai Tak Station |
R |
[3] |
|
KAT-P1-3 |
Residential
premises near Kai Tak Station |
R |
[3] |
|
KAT-P1-4 |
Residential
premises near Kai Tak Station |
R |
[3] |
|
KAT-P1-5 |
Residential
premises near Kai Tak Station |
R |
[3] |
|
KAT-P1-6 |
Residential
premises near Kai Tak Station |
R |
[3] |
|
KAT-P1-7 |
Residential
premises near Kai Tak Station |
R |
[3] |
|
KAT-P2 |
Public Housing Development at ex-San |
||
|
KAT-P2-1 |
Public
Housing Development at ex-San |
R |
[2] |
|
HOM-P2 |
Proposed Dormitory for HKPU |
||
|
HOM-P2 |
Proposed
Dormitory for HKPU |
R |
- |
Notes:
[1] R–
residential; E – educational; H – clinic/ home for the aged; W – worship; GIC –
government, institution and community; P – performing arts centres
[2] To be
determined by respective project proponents
[3] Not available from approved EIA Report: EIA-157/2008
7.4.1 Air Pollution Sources
Construction of the Project would inevitably
generate air pollutants with potential impacts on neighbouring sensitive
receivers. As discussed in Section 3, the key elements under this
EIA include the HHS at Hung Hom Freight Yard, construction of KAT and DIH, and
the modification works at HUH. It should be noted that the EIA studies for SCL
(MKK-HUH), SCL (HUH-ADM) and SCL (TAW-HUH) are assessed based on the design
option of Diamond Hill Stabling Sidings (DHS). The worksites for the
construction of HHS option considered in this EIA would therefore be different
from the abovementioned EIA studies.
These air pollutant emission sources
include fugitive dust from various construction activities, including
excavation, stockpiling, and cut-and cover section for Project and fugitive dust from
stockpiles within ex- Kai Tak Airport etc. There would be no concrete batching plant
operating under the SCL (HHS).
Apart
from the above construction activities, loading and unloading of materials at
barging facilities for other projects would also generate potential dust
impact. Based on the latest construction programme, 2 barging facilities will
be needed to support the material transfer for SCL (MKK-HUH) and SCL (TAW-HUH).
The locations of these barging facilities are listed below:
·
Freight Pier at Hung Hom (shared use); and
· Kai Tak
Runway
The proposed stabling sidings will
be electrically operated, air quality impact associated with train emission is
therefore not anticipated. Exhausts for general ventilation and smoke
extraction facilities will also be carefully positioned to avoid causing
nuisance to the surrounding environment. In addition, only light maintenance
such as occasional track washing will be carried out during the operation of
HHS. No significant air quality impact is therefore anticipated during the
operational phase.
Since freight train (with diesel
locomotive) operations have been discontinued, and intercity service would
remain the same in fairly low frequency, less emission would be envisaged
from diesel locomotives as compared to the current situation. No
additional gaseous emission associated with diesel combustion, and hence no
adverse operational air quality impact is therefore anticipated.
7.4.2 Potential Concurrent Projects
The tentative
commencement year for the construction of Project is 2012, and would take
approximately 6 years for completion. All concurrent projects, which may have
cumulative environmental impacts during its construction period, have been
identified and summarised in the table below. Details of these concurrent
projects are given in Section 7.5.3.
Table 7.5: Key Concurrent Projects for Air Quality Assessment
|
Key Concurrent Projects |
Tentative
Construction Programme |
|
Central
|
2015 – 2020 |
|
Trunk Road T2 |
2012 – 2016 |
|
Kai Tak Development |
2009 – 2021 |
|
Shatin to Central Link – Tai Wai to Hung Hom Section |
2012 – 2018 |
|
Shatin to Central Link – Mong Kok East to Hung Hom Section (Phase I) |
2012 – 2018 |
|
Shatin to Central Link – Hung Hom to Admiralty Section (Phase II) |
2012 – 2020 |
|
Kwun Tong Line Extension |
2011 – 2015 |
|
|
2009 – 2012 |
|
Tsz Wan Shan Pedestrian Link |
2013 – 2015 |
There are 3 existing concrete batching
plants (CBPs) within the ex-Kai Tak Airport area, including the Yue Xiu CBP,
Glorious CBP, and Yau Lee CBP. Based on the latest information provided by
relevant government departments, the Yue Xiu CBP, Glorious CBP and the
associated sand depot would cease operation before SCL commences construction.
The dust emissions from the Yau Lee CBP, on the other hand, have been included
in the cumulative impact assessment. In addition, the landlot next to the
proposed TKW (as shown in Appendix 7.5) could be used for concrete
batching plant or sand depot under short-term tenancy. Although the newly
identified sites are yet to be confirmed, their potential emissions have been
included in this assessment.
7.5.1 Potential Source of Dust
A review has been conducted on the
construction methodology (see Section 3
for details) for various works areas at DIH, KAT and HHS. Construction dust
will be potentially generated from mainly the land-based construction works
including the following activities:
·
Soil
excavation;
·
Backfilling;
·
Temporary
storage of spoil on site;
·
Construction
of portals and cut-&-cover tunnel;
·
Temporary
storage, handling and transportation of material at tunnel exit sites;
·
Construction
of infrastructure and utilities; and
·
Loading
and unloading of excavated materials / fill materials at barging facility
Since
excavation and backfilling activities will involve large quantities of
earthworks and silty material handling, it is anticipated that there may be
elevated dust levels due to these activities if appropriate mitigation measures
are not implemented.
7.5.2 Assessment Year
A review of the tentative construction programme has been conducted to identify the construction period which is deemed to have significant impact on nearby ASRs. Based on the construction programme as shown in Appendix 7.2, it is identified that all the dusty construction activities, such as cut-&-cover and open cut excavation, would be taken place during Year 2014, particularly the worksites for KAT, where cumulative impacts from other projects in Kai Tak area are anticipated.
7.5.3 Emission Inventory
Dust Emission associated with the Project
Fugitive dust impact assessments
were carried out based on conservative assumptions of general construction
activities which include the following:
·
Heavy
construction activities including site clearance, ground excavation,
construction of the associated facilities, haul road etc;
·
Wind
erosion of all active open sites, including stockpile and barging area;
·
Loading/unloading
from trucks at barging facilities and stockpiles;
·
All
construction activities at work sites and areas that would be undertaken
concurrently during the major construction period throughout Year 2014 in order to assess the worst case
situation
·
12
hours a day from 7:00am to 7:00pm, except Sundays and public holidays.
The
prediction of dust emissions is based on typical values and emission factors
from United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Compilation of Air
Pollution Emission Factors (AP-42), 5th Edition. Calculation of dust emission
factors is given in Appendix 7.3.
References of the calculations of dust emission factors for different
dust generating activities are listed below.
Detailed descriptions are also discussed in the following sections.
Table 7.6a: References of Dust Emission Factors for Different
Activities
i)
SCL – Stabling Sidings at Hung Hom
Freight Yard – Heavy Construction Works, Wind Erosion and Stockpile
Dust
emission from construction vehicle movement will generally be limited within
the confined worksites area and the emission factor given in AP-42 S.13.2.3.3
has taken this factor into account, as indicated in the approved EIA Study “Kai Tak Development” (EIA-157/208). Watering facilities will be provided at every
designated vehicular exit point. Haul
roads within the work sites would be paved and water spraying would be provided
to keep them in wet condition. Since all vehicles will be washed at exit points
and vehicle loaded with the dusty materials will be covered entirely by clean
impervious sheeting before leaving the construction site, dust nuisance from
construction vehicle movement outside the worksites is unlikely to be
significant.
For
stockpiling, it is recommended that vehicles will move to the stockpiling areas
where C&D materials will be unloaded immediately. The vehicles will then be
washed again before leaving the stockpiles in order to minimise generation of
dusty materials. Therefore, the major dust generating activities at stockpiling
areas will be originated mainly from wind erosion and loading/unloading of
materials; and these will be assumed in the fugitive dust modelling.
For the
calculation of 1-hour and 24-hour TSP concentration, an active operating area
of 30% has been assumed at any one time. Based on the justification for
the percentage of active area provided in Appendix 7.4, the actual percentage active area
associated with construction works would however be less than 30% during the
construction period. However, in order to be conservative, a 100% active area
screening test has been undertaken initially for the short term hourly and
daily TSP assessment as detailed in the Section
7.5.4.
For the
calculation of annual TSP construction, the active works area over the entire
year would be less than for a typical hour and typical day. On this basis, further information has been
obtained from the Project Proponent, and it is confirmed that a 6% active
operating area would be a practicable assumption. The active operating area for
1-hr, 24-hr and annual concentration has been agreed by the Engineer. Appendix 7.4 presents the justification for
the percentage of active areas.
It should be
noted that there would still be some minor construction works being conducted
during grouting. However, as all grouting works would be carried out in a
caution way and fugitive dust generation can be controlled at a minimum level,
there would be insignificant fugitive dust impacts from this source.
Dust Emission associated with Concurrent
Projects
i)
SCL – Tai Wai to Hung Hom Section
All the construction
works, including site clearance, ground excavation, cut-&-cover tunnel
section etc., presented in the EIA report for SCL (TAW-HUH) would be included
in this assessment to account for the cumulative impacts. However, it should be
noted that the construction works under the HHS options at KAT and DIH will be
different from the original configuration adopted in the SCL (TAW-HUH) EIA.
Hence dust emissions from the construction of Diamond Hill Stabling Siding
(DHS), KAT and DIH based on the scheme assessed in the SCL (TAW-HUH) would be
superseded and would not be included in the cumulative assessment as it is
assumed in this EIA that the HHS options would be adopted and emissions from
the construction of these elements are assessed based on the scheme proposed
under the Project. Nevertheless, dust emission from the barging facilities
adjacent to To Kwa Wan Typhoon Shelter (i.e. Kai Tak Runway) associated with
SCL (TAW-HUH) would be included in the cumulative assessment in this EIA.
Latest available information has been obtained from the EIA for SCL (TAW-HUH)
and is adopted in the assessment.
ii)
SCL – Mong Kok East to Hung Hom
Section and Hung Hom to Admiralty Section
The other
sections of the SCL, namely Mong Kok East to Hung Hom Section (SCL (MKK-HUH)), and
Hung Hom to Admiralty Section (SCL (HUH-ADM)) would also have cumulative
impacts. SCL (MKK-HUH) will include the realignment work for the existing East
Rail Line tracks from south of Mong Kok East to the new HUH, while SCL
(HUH-ADM) will include the construction of the section across the harbour from
Hung Hom to Admiralty. Similar to the case for DHS, KAT and DIH mentioned
above, since it is assumed in this EIA that the HHS option would be adopted,
dust emission from the construction of HUH based on the scheme assessed in the
SCL (MKK-HUH) would not be included in the cumulative assessment. Emission from
the construction of HUH would be assessed as per the scheme proposed under the
Project.
According to
the current construction programme, construction works and dusty activity at
the Freight Pier barging facility associated with the SCL (MKK-HUH) and SCL
(HUH-ADM) will be interfacing this Project at Hung Hom Area. Appendix 7.6 illustrates
the possible arrangement in Freight Pier Barging Facility. As such, cumulative
dust impact is therefore anticipated. Dust emission details have been obtained
from the respective consultant and included in the assessment to account for
the cumulative effect.
iii)
Kwun Tong Line Extension (KTE) &
associated EPIW
The KTE
project is approximate 3km extension of the existing Kwun Tong Line from Yau Ma
Tei Station to a new station at Whampoa and with an interchange with the SCL at
the proposed HOM. It is expected to be completed in 2015.
With
reference to the approved EIA Study “Kwun Tong Line Extension”
(AEIAR-154/2010), construction works under KTE Project will likely be
interfacing the Project in Hung Hom and Ho Man Tin areas. Potential dusty
activities are generally similar to those associated with this Project. In
particular, one rock crushing facility would be located at the worksite in HOM
Station and two others would be located at the Freight Pier barging point.
Hence, dust emissions are anticipated during unloading activities and the
discharge point of the dust extraction systems. As such, cumulative dust impact
is therefore anticipated. Dust emission details have been extracted from the
approved EIA Study and all the assessment scenarios have been included in the
assessment to account for the cumulative effect.
iv)
Kai Tak Development
Redevelopment
plan for the former
·
Trunk
Road T2;
·
Multi-purpose
Stadium Complex;
·
Kai
Tak Nullah;
·
Other
infrastructures, including pumping stations, local roads and distributors.
Based on the
construction programme presented in LegCo Papers on Kai Tak Development (LC
Paper No. CB(1)570/08-09(03)), cumulative construction dust impact is expected
during the interaction with major dusty construction works associated with the
Project, which is expected to be undertaken in Year 2014. For the purpose of
cumulative impact assessment, construction works which are located within 500m
from the site boundary of this Project and are found to be overlapping with the
major construction of Project during Year 2014 will be included. In addition,
dust emission strengths presented in the approved EIA Study “Kai Tak Development” (KTD)
(AEIAR-130/2009) are adopted where appropriate.
v)
Central
Central Kowloon
Route (CKR) is a strategic road linking from Yau Ma Tai area to
vi)
Trunk Road T2
Trunk Road T2
is a dual two-lane trunk road of approximately 3.6 km long connecting the CKR
and Tseung Kwan O-Lam Tin Tunnel, and will form a new strategic highway network
in order to relieve the existing heavily trafficked road network in the central
and eastern Kowloon as well as Tseung Kwan O. However, the alignment of Trunk
Road T2 is located at more than 500m from ASRs of the Project. No significant cumulative
air quality impact is therefore anticipated.
vii)
A student
hostel to accommodate students from the
viii)
Tsz Wan Shan Pedestrian Link
Covered
walkway as well as lifts/escalators are proposed to connect the Tsz Wan Shan
residential to the DIH Station. Based on the current construction programme,
the associated construction works would likely interface with the major
construction of the Project during Year 2014. Hence, cumulative dust impact is
anticipated.
ix)
Concrete Batching Plants in ex-Kai
Tak Airport area
As discussed
in Section 7.5, there are currently
3 existing concrete batching plants (CBPs) within the ex-Kai Tak Airport area,
including the Yue Xiu CBP, Glorious CBP, and Yau Lee CBP. Based on the latest
information, the Yue Xiu CBP, Glorious CBP and the associated sand depot would
cease operation before SCL commences construction. Hence, there would not be cumulative dust
impacts from these 2 CBPs at their existing locations. The dust emissions from
the Yau Lee CBP, on ther other hand, have been included in the cumulative
impact assessment.
It was noted
at the time of reporting that the site next to TKW (as shown in Appendix 7.5) could be allocated for the use
of a new concrete batching plant and sand depot under short-term tenancy.
However, information on the capacity of these facilities was not available for
the assessment. In order to reasonably
consider cumulative impacts from the emissions of these potential albeit not
yet committed sources, an estimation of the capacity of these facilities was
made with reference to general practices of the industry. It was assumed that the production capacity
of the concrete batching plant would be 280 m3 per hour and the
total silo capacity would be 1050 tonnes. Dust emissions associated with the
plant, including emission from the dust collectors of silos and mixers, and
unloading of raw material to ground hopper within the plant and Kai Tak Barging
Facility, have therefore been assessed.
However, it
should be noted that, the concrete batching plant is controlled under the
Specified Process and hence sufficient mitigation measures would be implemented
to control the emission of dust. In general, the requirement and mitigation
measures stipulated in the Guidance Note
on the Best Practicable Means for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant) BPM 3/2(93) should be followed and
implemented. In particular, in order to minimise the overall dust impact on
nearby ASRs, the emission concentrations of the dust collector for the
cement/PFA silos and mixer could be designed to not more than 30 mg/m3
and 40 mg/m3 respectively. For unloading of aggregate from trucks at
the concrete batching plant, 3-sided enclosure with top cover and water sprays
could be provided to the ground hopper. The enclosure could be designed in such
a way that would minimise the gap between the enclosure structure and the truck
itself, which in turn would prevent dust from escaping the enclosure. With
provision of watering spraying system, dust generated from unloading activities
would be further suppressed within the enclosure, and hence would achieve an
overall dust removal efficiency of 95%. The above assumptions have therefore
been adopted for the purposed of potential cumulative impact assessment in this
EIA. However, it is understood that the design of the potential new CBP is
still subject to change. Once the use of the site is committed, the Contractor
is required to demonstrate that the future design of the concrete batching
plant would not cause unacceptable impacts. References of the calculations of
dust emission factors for different dust generating activities are listed
below.
Table 7.6b: References of Dust Emission Factors for Concrete
Batching Plant
7.5.4 Assessment Methodology
Dust impact
assessment was undertaken using the Fugitive Dust Model (FDM) as approved by
USEPA and EPD. It is a well-known
Gaussian Plume model designed for computing air dispersion model for fugitive
dust sources. Modelling parameters
including dust emission factors, particles size distributions, surface
roughness, etc are referred to in EPD’s “Guideline on choice of models and
model parameters” and USEPA’s AP-42. The
density of dust will be assumed to be 2.5g/m3. The 5-year mean of the annual averaged TSP
concentration will be taken as the background concentration. As mentioned in Section 7.3, the TSP background concentration of 75.2ug/m3
is adopted for the fugitive dust modelling. A surface roughness of 100 cm is
assumed in the model to represent the terrain.
During
daytime working hours (7am to 7pm), it is assumed that dust emissions would be
generated from all dust generating activities and site erosion. During
night-time non-working hours (7pm to 7am of the next day), Sunday and statutory
holidays, dust emission source would only be site erosion as construction
activities during these hours are ceased.
The
worst-case 1-hour, worst-case 24-hour average and annual TSP concentrations
were calculated mainly based on real meteorological data (for Year 2008) on
wind direction, wind speed, temperature and stability collected from the nearest
weather station, the Hong Kong Observatory meteorological station for the
construction site in the Kowloon Area. The anemometer height at Hong Kong
Observatory is 42m above ground. A summary showing the validity of
meteorological data from Year 2004 – 2008 respective to different weather
stations is shown in Table 7.7.
Table 7.7: Summary of data validity of meteorological data from
Year 2004 – 2008
|
Stations |
Data Validity |
||||
|
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
|
|
Kai Tak |
91% |
96% |
96% |
89% |
81% |
|
King's Park |
89% |
92% |
87% |
90% |
92% |
|
HKO |
97% |
96% |
95% |
95% |
95% |
|
CPH |
92% |
94% |
94% |
93% |
N/A |
Fugitive dust
assessment was conducted at 1.5m, 5m, 10m, 15m and 20m above local ground level.
A summary of modelling parameters adopted in the assessment are given in the
table below:
Table 7.8: Modelling Parameters
|
Parameters |
Input |
Remark |
|
Particle size distribution |
1.25um = 7% 3.75um = 20% 7.5um = 20% 12.5um = 18% 22.5um = 35% |
Reference from S13.2.4.3 of USEPA AP-42 |
|
Background Concentration |
5-year averaged value recorded at Tsuen
Wan, Kwai Chung, Sham Shui Po, Kwun Tong and Central/Western Monitoring
Stations |
Tsuen Wan, Kwai Chung, Sham Shui Po, Kwun Tong,
Central/Western Monitoring Stations for Kowloon Area (75.2 μg/m3) |
|
Modeling mode |
Flatted terrain |
- |
|
Meteorological data |
Data recorded in 2008 at Hong Kong
Observatory (HKO) Meteorological Station |
HKO for Kowloon Area (i.e. DIH to HUH) |
|
Anemometer Height |
42m for HKO |
- |
|
Surface Roughness |
100cm |
- |
|
Emission period |
General construction activities during
daytime working hours (7 am to 7 pm) Wind erosion during both day-time (7am to 7pm)
and night-time (7pm to 7am of the next day) |
- |
|
ASR calculating levels |
1.5, 5, 10, 15, and 20m |
- |
In terms
of the construction programme, it should be noted that the sequencing of works
for each works activity over each works site or area will be determined by the
Contractor and is not known at this stage. However, due to the
constrained size of the works sites and areas and the tight construction
programme constraints, it will be necessary for active construction activities
to be undertaken at moving multiple work phases spread across each site.
Therefore, it is not feasible to identify the exact locations of individual
dust emission sources. As such, for the long term annual predictions, the
dust modelling assessment has assumed that the dust emissions would be
distributed across the whole area of each site to reasonably represent this
mode of working and the dust emission rates have been proportioned to produce
the effect of 6% active works site. Appendices 7.2 and 7.4 present the tentative construction programme
and justification for the percentage of active areas respectively.
For the short
term 1-hour and 24-hour periods, it is assumed that a total works area of 30%
on each site would only be active at any one time and again active construction
activities to be undertaken at moving multiple work faces spread across each
site. Based upon this, works activities and plant would neither cover the
whole site area nor be concentrated in certain areas of the site close to ASRs
at any time during the construction period. However, notwithstanding that
such a scenario would not be expected to occur, in order to be conservative, an
initial screening test has been undertaken, namely “Tier 1 Screening
Test”. The Tier 1 screening test is conservative and has simulated an
absolute worst case situation, whereby all the worksites would be active (i.e.
100%).
The purpose
of this absolute worst case Tier 1 screening assessment is to highlight those
areas where construction dust may accumulate and potentially become an issue. The
hot spot areas identified in the Tier 1 assessment have been subsequently
assessed by a more focused Tier 2 test, where it is assumed that the projected
actual 30% active works areas for the construction site is positioned closest
to the potentially worst affected ASRs, while emission from all the other sites
remain at 100% as per Tier 1. Thus, the Tier 2 assessment is also very
conservative as it assumes that all works activities with the associated plant
would be undertaken in the closest proximity to the potentially affected ASRs
at the same time, which as noted above would not occur.
For the
concurrent projects, including SCL (TAW-HUH), SCL (MKK-HUH), SCL (HUH-ADM),
KTE, the Polytechnic University Student Hostel, and the Tsz Wan Shan Pedestrian
Link, similar assumptions have been made for the calculations of the emission
factors for short and long-term assessments. For the committed Kai Tai
Development (KTD), as mentioned above, the dust emission strength presented in
the approved KTD EIA are adopted where appropriate.
7.5.5
Assessment
Results - “Unmitigated” Scenario
Cumulative construction dust impacts arisen due to the construction of the Projects and concurrent projects listed in Section 7.5.3 have been assessed. Cumulative unmitigated 1-hour, 24-hour, and annual TSP levels predicted at identified ASRs are given in Tables 7.9a-b respectively. Results show that exceedances of the relevant Air Quality Objectives (AQOs) would be predicted without mitigation. Mitigation measures are considered necessary to reduce predicted dust impacts. Figures 7.2.0A – 7.2.0F illustrate the cumulative unmitigated 1-hour, 24-hour, and annual TSP concentrations in Diamond Hill-Kai Tak Area and Hung Hom-Ho Man Tin Area.
Table
7.9a: Predicted
Unmitigated Cumulative 1-hour and 24-hour TSP Concentrations at various heights
above Ground (including background concentration of 75.2μg/m3)
|
ASR ID |
Location |
1-hour
TSP Concentrations at various height(μg/m3) |
24-hour
TSP Concentrations at various height(μg/m3) |
||||||||
|
1.5m |
5m |
10m |
15m |
20m |
1.5m |
5m |
10m |
15m |
20m |
||
|
DIH-5-1 |
Rainbow Home |
824 |
843 |
723 |
578 |
448 |
192 |
200 |
186 |
169 |
151 |
|
DIH-5-2 |
Residential premises |
800 |
813 |
687 |
538 |
463 |
208 |
216 |
198 |
177 |
155 |
|
DIH-5-5 |
Our Lady’s Kindergarten |
677 |
701 |
616 |
512 |
423 |
178 |
185 |
173 |
160 |
145 |
|
DIH 6-1 |
Wong Tai Sin Fire Station and Quarters Block A |
951 |
962 |
804 |
618 |
458 |
218 |
223 |
199 |
173 |
153 |
|
DIH-7-1 |
|
1241 |
1216 |
941 |
646 |
487 |
322 |
321 |
267 |
208 |
160 |
|
DIH-7-2 |
|
1139 |
1128 |
896 |
639 |
480 |
290 |
291 |
248 |
199 |
158 |
|
DIH-8-1 |
|
1339 |
1287 |
955 |
619 |
490 |
401 |
397 |
322 |
244 |
181 |
|
DIH-9-1 |
Shek On Building |
1923 |
1753 |
1144 |
631 |
514 |
715 |
655 |
438 |
261 |
199 |
|
DIH-10-1 |
Hong Kong Sheung Keung Hui Nursing Home |
1856 |
1678 |
1081 |
615 |
516 |
687 |
634 |
431 |
260 |
201 |
|
DIH-11-1 |
Lung |
3021 |
2343 |
1226 |
823 |
589 |
1102 |
638 |
331 |
262 |
222 |
|
DIH-12-1 |
Galaxia Tower B |
1734 |
1651 |
1216 |
877 |
665 |
442 |
417 |
341 |
284 |
236 |
|
DIH-12-2 |
Galaxia Tower E |
2168 |
1998 |
1368 |
922 |
679 |
469 |
464 |
388 |
308 |
243 |
|
DIH-13-1 |
|
1560 |
1438 |
1000 |
619 |
505 |
583 |
555 |
407 |
267 |
197 |
|
DIH-14-1 |
|
1726 |
1755 |
1446 |
1171 |
917 |
378 |
339 |
313 |
285 |
255 |
|
DIH-14-2 |
|
3079 |
2965 |
2217 |
1517 |
988 |
402 |
401 |
347 |
289 |
237 |
|
DIH-14-3 |
|
2149 |
2123 |
1648 |
1204 |
882 |
440 |
450 |
405 |
351 |
296 |
|
DIH-14-4 |
|
1708 |
1488 |
1214 |
1005 |
790 |
546 |
487 |
325 |
263 |
242 |
|
DIH-14-5 |
|
1997 |
1685 |
1402 |
1111 |
829 |
470 |
388 |
298 |
275 |
250 |
|
DIH-14-6 |
|
1894 |
1958 |
1666 |
1326 |
1001 |
339 |
350 |
324 |
291 |
255 |
|
DIH-15-1 |
Choi Hung Estate - Kam Wan House |
1870 |
1915 |
1599 |
1288 |
994 |
220 |
227 |
206 |
191 |
178 |
|
DIH-15-2 |
Choi Hung Estate - Pik Hoi House |
2411 |
2472 |
2064 |
1602 |
1178 |
278 |
284 |
249 |
219 |
198 |
|
DIH-17-1 |
Chuk Yuen United Village |
830 |
846 |
725 |
577 |
446 |
259 |
266 |
238 |
205 |
172 |
|
DIH-25-1 |
Football Field in |
1521 |
1375 |
882 |
638 |
526 |
390 |
367 |
271 |
211 |
181 |
|
DIH-26-1 |
|
1615 |
1713 |
1525 |
1292 |
1046 |
211 |
220 |
203 |
183 |
164 |
|
KAT-1-1 |
|
1336 |
1276 |
942 |
691 |
527 |
546 |
533 |
415 |
297 |
206 |
|
HOM-3-1 |
|
511 |
551 |
512 |
469 |
426 |
162 |
170 |
163 |
155 |
147 |
|
HOM-3-2 |
|
476 |
518 |
489 |
454 |
416 |
154 |
162 |
157 |
151 |
143 |
|
HOM-4-1 |
Yee Fu Building |
416 |
454 |
432 |
405 |
374 |
148 |
155 |
152 |
150 |
147 |
|
HOM-5-1 |
|
432 |
473 |
450 |
422 |
390 |
148 |
157 |
156 |
157 |
169 |
|
HUH-1-1 |
|
429 |
470 |
448 |
421 |
390 |
164 |
158 |
158 |
158 |
157 |
|
HUH-1-2 |
Lok Ka House |
462 |
458 |
432 |
429 |
405 |
191 |
161 |
158 |
166 |
166 |
|
HUH-1-3 |
|
505 |
491 |
465 |
457 |
427 |
202 |
182 |
171 |
170 |
163 |
|
HUH-2-1 |
|
1015 |
782 |
448 |
408 |
376 |
375 |
300 |
170 |
147 |
138 |
|
HUH-3-1 |
|
1577 |
856 |
454 |
430 |
402 |
338 |
248 |
145 |
141 |
135 |
|
HUH-4-1 |
The |
926 |
774 |
430 |
384 |
361 |
304 |
271 |
190 |
148 |
132 |
|
HUH-5-1 |
|
1756 |
1230 |
549 |
367 |
321 |
287 |
257 |
184 |
137 |
127 |
|
HUH-6-1 |
HK |
933 |
722 |
537 |
477 |
419 |
361 |
307 |
199 |
148 |
137 |
|
HUH-7-1 |
Hotel Nikko |
1776 |
1354 |
601 |
461 |
412 |
367 |
300 |
175 |
144 |
135 |
|
HUH-9-1 |
|
Note [3] |
Note [3] |
394 |
374 |
352 |
Note [3] |
Note [3] |
170 |
134 |
127 |
|
HUH-10-1 |
Harbourfront Horizon |
Note [3] |
976 |
500 |
330 |
294 |
Note [3] |
337 |
225 |
152 |
128 |
|
HUH-11-1 |
|
2179 |
936 |
467 |
440 |
410 |
650 |
277 |
176 |
145 |
138 |
|
KAT-P1-1 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [1] |
|||||||||
|
KAT-P1-2 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [1] |
|||||||||
|
KAT-P1-3 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [2] |
|||||||||
|
KAT-P1-4 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [2] |
|||||||||
|
KAT-P1-5 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station [4] |
Note [3] |
4872 |
2625 |
1505 |
1082 |
Note [3] |
1010 |
601 |
400 |
286 |
|
KAT-P1-6 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station [4] |
Note [3] |
2106 |
1333 |
872 |
700 |
Note [3] |
804 |
568 |
398 |
279 |
|
KAT-P1-7 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [2] |
|||||||||
|
KAT-P2-1 |
Public Housing Development at ex-San |
1889 |
1843 |
1403 |
990 |
703 |
536 |
498 |
349 |
311 |
271 |
|
HOM-P2 |
Proposed Dormitory for HKPU |
468 |
510 |
484 |
451 |
415 |
151 |
159 |
155 |
149 |
142 |
Notes:
Values
which exceeded AQO are shown as bolded characters
[1] The
population intake of this project would be after Year 2016 (Referenced from
approved Kai Tak Development EIA Report), and hence there are no cumulative
construction dust impact from the projects
[2] The premises is located within the works site
boundary, hence the population intake would be after the construction of the
Project i.e. no impact from the Project
[3] No air sensitive use is observed at such
levels –
|
|
Air sensitive use
is on the podium of the HUH station, which is at least 10mAG. First
assessment height is therefore considered at 10mAG. |
|
Harbourfront
Horizon (HUH-10-1): |
The first floor of
residential units is situated on the podium, which is at least 5m above
ground. First assessment height is therefore considered at 5mAG. |
|
Residential premises
near Kai Tak Station (KAT-P1-5 / KAT-P1-6): |
These residential
premises are currently occupied for the construction of public rental
housing, which would have a 5m height lift lobby on the ground floor. First
assessment height is therefore considered at 5mAG |
[4] The assessment results are for indication
only as there are no air sensitive uses when the Yau Lee CBP is in operation.
Table 7.9b: Predicted Unmitigated Cumulative Annual TSP
Concentrations at various heights above Ground (including background
concentration of 75.2μg/m3)
|
ASR ID |
Location |
Annual
TSP Concentrations at various height(μg/m3) |
||||
|
1.5m |
5m |
10m |
15m |
20m |
||
|
DIH-5-1 |
Rainbow Home |
75.8 |
75.7 |
75.6 |
75.6 |
75.5 |
|
DIH-5-2 |
Residential premises |
75.7 |
75.7 |
75.6 |
75.5 |
75.5 |
|
DIH-5-5 |
Our Lady’s Kindergarten |
75.6 |
75.6 |
75.6 |
75.5 |
75.5 |
|
DIH 6-1 |
Wong Tai Sin Fire Station and Quarters Block A |
75.8 |
75.8 |
75.8 |
75.7 |
75.6 |
|
DIH-7-1 |
|
76.2 |
76.3 |
76.1 |
76.0 |
75.8 |
|
DIH-7-2 |
|
76.1 |
76.1 |
76.0 |
75.9 |
75.8 |
|
DIH-8-1 |
|
77.8 |
77.9 |
77.5 |
77.0 |
76.6 |
|
DIH-9-1 |
Shek On Building |
80.7 |
80.5 |
79.3 |
78.1 |
77.2 |
|
DIH-10-1 |
Hong Kong Sheung Keung Hui Nursing Home |
80.7 |
80.5 |
79.4 |
78.2 |
77.3 |
|
DIH-11-1 |
Lung |
81.9 |
77.7 |
76.2 |
75.8 |
75.6 |
|
DIH-12-1 |
Galaxia Tower B |
76.8 |
76.7 |
76.3 |
76.0 |
75.8 |
|
DIH-12-2 |
Galaxia Tower E |
76.2 |
76.1 |
75.9 |
75.7 |
75.6 |
|
DIH-13-1 |
|
79.5 |
79.5 |
78.7 |
77.8 |
77.1 |
|
DIH-14-1 |
|
76.6 |
76.5 |
76.2 |
75.9 |
75.7 |
|
DIH-14-2 |
|
76.6 |
76.5 |
76.3 |
76.1 |
75.9 |
|
DIH-14-3 |
|
77.0 |
76.9 |
76.5 |
76.2 |
76.0 |
|
DIH-14-4 |
|
78.1 |
77.8 |
76.8 |
76.2 |
75.9 |
|
DIH-14-5 |
|
77.0 |
76.7 |
76.2 |
75.9 |
75.7 |
|
DIH-14-6 |
|
76.5 |
76.5 |
76.2 |
75.9 |
75.7 |
|
DIH-15-1 |
Choi Hung Estate - Kam Wan House |
75.8 |
75.8 |
75.8 |
75.7 |
75.6 |
|
DIH-15-2 |
Choi Hung Estate - Pik Hoi House |
75.9 |
75.9 |
75.9 |
75.8 |
75.7 |
|
DIH-17-1 |
Chuk Yuen United Village |
76.1 |
76.1 |
76.0 |
75.9 |
75.8 |
|
DIH-25-1 |
Football Field in |
78.8 |
78.7 |
78.0 |
77.3 |
76.7 |
|
DIH-26-1 |
|
75.8 |
75.9 |
75.8 |
75.7 |
75.6 |
|
KAT-1-1 |
|
79.4 |
79.4 |
78.8 |
78.1 |
77.4 |
|
HOM-3-1 |
|
76.3 |
76.3 |
76.3 |
76.2 |
76.1 |
|
HOM-3-2 |
|
76.2 |
76.3 |
76.3 |
76.4 |
76.3 |
|
HOM-4-1 |
Yee Fu Building |
76.2 |
76.3 |
76.4 |
76.5 |
76.5 |
|
HOM-5-1 |
|
76.5 |
76.6 |
76.7 |
77.0 |
76.9 |
|
HUH-1-1 |
|
76.7 |
76.7 |
76.6 |
76.6 |
76.5 |
|
HUH-1-2 |
Lok Ka House |
77.0 |
76.6 |
76.4 |
76.4 |
76.3 |
|
HUH-1-3 |
|
77.3 |
76.7 |
76.3 |
76.2 |
76.1 |
|
HUH-2-1 |
|
78.8 |
78.3 |
77.2 |
76.6 |
76.2 |
|
HUH-3-1 |
|
77.3 |
77.1 |
76.5 |
76.2 |
76.0 |
|
HUH-4-1 |
The |
76.5 |
76.4 |
76.2 |
75.9 |
75.8 |
|
HUH-5-1 |
|
77.4 |
77.2 |
76.7 |
76.3 |
76.1 |
|
HUH-6-1 |
HK |
80.4 |
80.2 |
79.1 |
78.1 |
77.3 |
|
HUH-7-1 |
Hotel Nikko |
79.8 |
79.4 |
78.3 |
77.5 |
76.8 |
|
HUH-9-1 |
|
Note [3] |
Note [3] |
76.4 |
76.1 |
75.9 |
|
HUH-10-1 |
Harbourfront Horizon |
Note [3] |
79.2 |
77.7 |
76.8 |
76.3 |
|
HUH-11-1 |
|
80.6 |
77.5 |
76.4 |
76.0 |
75.9 |
|
KAT-P1-1 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [1] |
||||
|
KAT-P1-2 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [1] |
||||
|
KAT-P1-3 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [2] |
||||
|
KAT-P1-4 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [2] |
||||
|
KAT-P1-5 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station [4] |
Note [3] |
83.3 |
78.7 |
77.3 |
76.7 |
|
KAT-P1-6 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station [4] |
Note [3] |
83.3 |
82.0 |
80.9 |
79.8 |
|
KAT-P1-7 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [2] |
||||
|
KAT-P2-1 |
Public Housing Development at ex-San |
78.3 |
78.2 |
77.5 |
76.8 |
76.4 |
|
HOM-P2 |
Proposed Dormitory for HKPU |
76.2 |
76.3 |
76.3 |
76.4 |
76.2 |
Notes:
Values
which exceeded AQO are shown as bolded characters
[1] The
population intake of this project would be after Year 2016 (Referenced from
approved Kai Tak Development EIA Report), and hence there are no cumulative
construction dust impact from the projects
[2] The premises is located within the works site
boundary, hence the population intake would be after the construction of the
Project i.e. no impact from the Project
[3] No air sensitive use is observed at such
levels –
|
|
Air sensitive use
is on the podium of the HUH station, which is at least 10mAG. First
assessment height is therefore considered at 10mAG. |
|
Harbourfront
Horizon (HUH-10-1): |
The first floor of
residential units is situated on the podium, which is at least 5m above
ground. First assessment height is therefore considered at 5mAG. |
|
Residential
premises near Kai Tak Station (KAT-P1-5 / KAT-P1-6): |
These residential premises
are currently occupied for the construction of public rental housing, which
would have a 5m height lift lobby on the ground floor. First assessment
height is therefore considered at 5mAG |
[4] The assessment results are for indication
only as there are no air sensitive uses when the Yau Lee CBP is in operation.
7.5.6
Recommended
Mitigation Measures for Fugitive Dust
In order to
reduce the dust emission from the Project and achieve compliances of TSP
criteria at ASRs, the following specific mitigation measures are recommended:
i)
Mitigation
measures in form of regular watering under a good site practice should be
adopted. In accordance with the “Control of Open Fugitive Dust Sources” (USEPA
AP-42) as given in Appendix 7.4, watering once per hour on
exposed worksites and haul road is proposed to achieve dust removal efficiency
of 91.7%. These dust suppression efficiencies are derived based on the average
haul road traffic, average evaporation rate and an assumed application
intensity of 1.8 L/m2 for the respective watering frequencies (see Appendix 7.4). Any potential dust
impact and watering mitigation would be subject to the actual site conditions.
For example, a construction activity that produces inherently wet
conditions or in cases under rainy weather, the above water application
intensity may not be unreservedly applied. While the above watering
frequencies are to be followed, the extent of watering may vary depending on
actual site conditions but should be sufficient to maintain an equivalent
intensity of no less than 1.8 L/m2 to achieve the respective dust
removal efficiencies. The dust levels would be monitored and managed
under an EM&A programme as specified in the EM&A Manual.
In addition
to the abovementioned, the Contractor is also obliged to follow the procedures
and requirements given in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust)
Regulation. It stipulates the construction dust control requirements for both
Notifiable (e.g. site formation) and Regulatory (e.g. road opening) Works to be
carried out by the Contractor.
In accordance
with the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation, the following
dust suppression measures should also be incorporated by the Contractor to
control the dust nuisance throughout the construction phase:
·
Any
excavated or stockpile of dusty material should be covered entirely by
impervious sheeting or sprayed with water to maintain the entire surface wet and
then removed or backfilled or reinstated where practicable within 24 hours of
the excavation or unloading;
·
Any
dusty materials remaining after a stockpile is removed should be wetted with
water and cleared from the surface of roads;
·
A
stockpile of dusty material should not be extend beyond the pedestrian
barriers, fencing or traffic cones;
·
The
load of dusty materials on a vehicle leaving a construction site should be
covered entirely by impervious sheeting to ensure that the dusty materials do
not leak from the vehicle;
·
Where
practicable, vehicle washing facilities with high pressure water jet should be
provided at every discernible or designated vehicle exit point. The area where vehicle washing takes place
and the road section between the washing facilities and the exit point should
be paved with concrete, bituminous materials or hardcores;
·
When
there are open excavation and reinstatement works, hoarding of not less than
2.4m high should be provided as far as practicable along the site boundary with
provision for public crossing. Good site practice shall also be adopted by the
Contractor to ensure the conditions of the hoardings are properly maintained
throughout the construction period;
·
The
portion of any road leading only to construction site that is within 30m of a
vehicle entrance or exit should be kept clear of dusty materials;
·
Surfaces
where any pneumatic or power-driven drilling, cutting, polishing or other
mechanical breaking operation takes place should be sprayed with water or a
dust suppression chemical continuously;
·
Any
area that involves demolition activities should be sprayed with water or a dust
suppression chemical immediately prior to, during and immediately after the
activities so as to maintain the entire surface wet;
·
Where
a scaffolding is erected around the perimeter of a building under construction,
effective dust screens, sheeting or netting should be provided to enclose the
scaffolding from the ground floor level of the building, or a canopy should be
provided from the first floor level up to the highest level of the scaffolding;
·
Any
skip hoist for material transport should be totally enclosed by impervious
sheeting;
·
Every
stock of more than 20 bags of cement or dry pulverised fuel ash (PFA) should be
covered entirely by impervious sheeting or placed in an area sheltered on the
top and the 3 sides;
·
Cement
or dry PFA delivered in bulk should be stored in a closed silo fitted with an
audible high level alarm which is interlocked with the material filling line
and no overfilling is allowed;
·
Loading,
unloading, transfer, handling or storage of bulk cement or dry PFA should be
carried out in a totally enclosed system or facility, and any vent or exhaust
should be fitted with an effective fabric filter or equivalent air pollution
control system; and
·
Exposed
earth should be properly treated by compaction, turfing, hydroseeding,
vegetation planting or sealing with latex, vinyl, bitumen, shortcrete or other
suitable surface stabiliser within six months after the last construction activity
on the construction site or part of the construction site where the exposed
earth lies.
These
requirements should be incorporated into the Contract Specification for the
civil work. In addition, an audit and
monitoring programme during the construction phase should be implemented by the
Contractor to ensure that the construction dust impacts are controlled to
within the HKAQO. Detailed requirements for the audit and monitoring programme
are given separately in the EM&A manual.
7.5.7
Assessment
Results - “Mitigated” Scenario
Short-term Assessment (Tier 1)
The maximum
1-hour and 24-hour TSP concentrations based on Tier 1 screening test have been
assessed. Table 7.10 below
summaries the cumulative 1-hour and 24-hour TSP impact (Tier 1) at identified
ASRs. The results indicate that, for the majority of ASRs, exceedance of 1-hour
and 24-hour TSP criteria are not anticipated even assuming the absolute worst
case situation, whereby all the worksites would be active (i.e. 100%). However,
for the ASRs at the residential premises near Kai Tak Station (KAT-P1-5),
exceedance of 1-hour TSP criterion is predicted. As the Tier 1 assessment is
for screening purposes only and would not represent the actual on-site
situation, a more focused Tier 2 assessment has been undertaken.
In addition,
contour of Tier 1 1-hour and 24-hour TSP concentrations are shown in the Figures 7.2.1 – 7.2.4.
Contours indicate that there are no exceedances at other locations.
Table 7.10: Tier 1 Assessment - Predicted Mitigated Cumulative 1hr
& 24-hr TSP Concentrations at various heights above Ground (including
background concentration of 75.2μg/m3)
|
ASR ID |
Location |
1-hour
TSP Concentrations at various height(μg/m3) |
24-hour
TSP Concentrations at various height(μg/m3) |
||||||||
|
1.5m |
5m |
10m |
15m |
20m |
1.5m |
5m |
10m |
15m |
20m |
||
|
DIH-5-1 |
Rainbow Home |
180 |
182 |
175 |
166 |
156 |
107 |
98 |
94 |
92 |
90 |
|
DIH-5-2 |
Residential premises |
175 |
184 |
177 |
167 |
157 |
96 |
98 |
95 |
93 |
90 |
|
DIH-5-5 |
Our Lady’s Kindergarten |
187 |
178 |
172 |
164 |
154 |
98 |
95 |
93 |
91 |
89 |
|
DIH 6-1 |
Wong Tai Sin Fire Station and Quarters Block A |
176 |
185 |
177 |
168 |
157 |
96 |
97 |
95 |
93 |
90 |
|
DIH-7-1 |
|
183 |
192 |
183 |
172 |
160 |
100 |
101 |
98 |
94 |
91 |
|
DIH-7-2 |
|
181 |
190 |
182 |
171 |
159 |
98 |
100 |
97 |
94 |
91 |
|
DIH-8-1 |
|
186 |
195 |
186 |
174 |
161 |
108 |
107 |
103 |
98 |
93 |
|
DIH-9-1 |
Shek On Building |
229 |
214 |
193 |
179 |
166 |
129 |
124 |
111 |
102 |
95 |
|
DIH-10-1 |
Hong Kong Sheung Keung Hui Nursing Home |
223 |
208 |
195 |
180 |
166 |
127 |
122 |
111 |
103 |
96 |
|
DIH-11-1 |
Lung |
388 |
337 |
239 |
194 |
174 |
174 |
132 |
113 |
102 |
97 |
|
DIH-12-1 |
Galaxia Tower B |
284 |
284 |
242 |
207 |
181 |
121 |
122 |
116 |
109 |
104 |
|
DIH-12-2 |
Galaxia Tower E |
320 |
312 |
254 |
210 |
182 |
127 |
128 |
119 |
111 |
104 |
|
DIH-13-1 |
|
198 |
201 |
191 |
178 |
164 |
118 |
116 |
109 |
102 |
96 |
|
DIH-14-1 |
|
330 |
336 |
289 |
245 |
210 |
121 |
123 |
119 |
114 |
108 |
|
DIH-14-2 |
|
484 |
439 |
337 |
266 |
213 |
133 |
132 |
120 |
112 |
105 |
|
DIH-14-3 |
|
386 |
378 |
305 |
244 |
203 |
141 |
141 |
131 |
121 |
113 |
|
DIH-14-4 |
|
268 |
277 |
254 |
225 |
195 |
121 |
117 |
115 |
111 |
107 |
|
DIH-14-5 |
|
308 |
318 |
282 |
241 |
203 |
117 |
120 |
116 |
112 |
108 |
|
DIH-14-6 |
|
353 |
360 |
312 |
261 |
217 |
123 |
125 |
120 |
114 |
108 |
|
DIH-15-1 |
Choi Hung Estate - Kam Wan House |
329 |
339 |
299 |
255 |
214 |
104 |
106 |
104 |
101 |
98 |
|
DIH-15-2 |
Choi Hung Estate - Pik Hoi House |
364 |
373 |
324 |
271 |
224 |
112 |
113 |
109 |
105 |
100 |
|
DIH-17-1 |
Chuk Yuen United Village |
174 |
183 |
176 |
167 |
157 |
96 |
96 |
95 |
92 |
90 |
|
DIH-25-1 |
Football Field in |
206 |
214 |
201 |
185 |
169 |
107 |
109 |
104 |
99 |
94 |
|
DIH-26-1 |
|
286 |
301 |
277 |
248 |
217 |
98 |
99 |
98 |
96 |
94 |
|
KAT-1-1 |
|
313 |
305 |
248 |
198 |
169 |
150 |
148 |
129 |
113 |
101 |
|
HOM-3-1 |
|
222 |
219 |
220 |
223 |
203 |
110 |
112 |
108 |
104 |
101 |
|
HOM-3-2 |
|
207 |
209 |
213 |
240 |
243 |
105 |
108 |
114 |
125 |
126 |
|
HOM-4-1 |
Yee Fu Building |
199 |
197 |
211 |
260 |
308 |
106 |
108 |
112 |
129 |
146 |
|
HOM-5-1 |
|
237 |
211 |
216 |
288 |
352 |
119 |
120 |
123 |
147 |
168 |
|
HUH-1-1 |
|
341 |
240 |
200 |
281 |
302 |
164 |
144 |
125 |
148 |
157 |
|
HUH-1-2 |
Lok Ka House |
407 |
240 |
225 |
308 |
319 |
190 |
139 |
124 |
145 |
150 |
|
HUH-1-3 |
|
441 |
280 |
255 |
286 |
273 |
202 |
149 |
140 |
145 |
139 |
|
HUH-2-1 |
|
323 |
296 |
241 |
202 |
177 |
169 |
153 |
134 |
120 |
111 |
|
HUH-3-1 |
|
219 |
189 |
165 |
155 |
148 |
128 |
119 |
108 |
104 |
101 |
|
HUH-4-1 |
The |
283 |
264 |
204 |
156 |
146 |
135 |
131 |
117 |
106 |
99 |
|
HUH-5-1 |
|
342 |
324 |
256 |
165 |
142 |
117 |
118 |
111 |
104 |
98 |
|
HUH-6-1 |
HK |
225 |
203 |
185 |
171 |
157 |
135 |
126 |
110 |
105 |
101 |
|
HUH-7-1 |
Hotel Nikko |
285 |
240 |
174 |
161 |
151 |
119 |
112 |
107 |
102 |
99 |
|
HUH-9-1 |
|
Note [3] |
Note [3] |
208 |
171 |
146 |
Note [3] |
Note [3] |
107 |
101 |
97 |
|
HUH-10-1 |
Harbourfront Horizon |
Note [3] |
241 |
182 |
146 |
137 |
Note [3] |
124 |
105 |
101 |
96 |
|
HUH-11-1 |
|
413 |
265 |
183 |
169 |
155 |
193 |
140 |
116 |
109 |
103 |
|
KAT-P1-1 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [1] |
|||||||||
|
KAT-P1-2 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [1] |
|||||||||
|
KAT-P1-3 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [2] |
|||||||||
|
KAT-P1-4 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [2] |
|||||||||
|
KAT-P1-5 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station [4] |
Note [3] |
542 |
349 |
248 |
193 |
Note [3] |
175 |
139 |
120 |
108 |
|
KAT-P1-6 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station [4] |
Note [3] |
300 |
242 |
207 |
191 |
Note [3] |
154 |
133 |
115 |
103 |
|
KAT-P1-7 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [2] |
|||||||||
|
KAT-P2-1 |
Public Housing Development at ex-San |
336 |
332 |
274 |
224 |
186 |
146 |
139 |
126 |
118 |
111 |
|
HOM-P2 |
Proposed Dormitory for HKPU |
198 |
206 |
222 |
236 |
235 |
108 |
110 |
116 |
122 |
115 |
Notes:
Values
which exceeded AQO are shown as bolded characters
[1] The
population intake of this project would be after Year 2016 (Referenced from
approved Kai Tak Development EIA Report), and hence there are no cumulative
construction dust impact from the projects
[2] The premises is located within the works site
boundary, hence the population intake would be after the construction of the
Project i.e. no impact from the Project
[3] No air sensitive use is observed at such
levels –
|
|
Air sensitive use
is on the podium of the HUH station, which is at least 10mAG. First
assessment height is therefore considered at 10mAG. |
|
Harbourfront
Horizon (HUH-10-1): |
The first floor of
residential units is situated on the podium, which is at least 5m above
ground. First assessment height is therefore considered at 5mAG. |
|
Residential
premises near Kai Tak Station (KAT-P1-5 / KAT-P1-6): |
These residential
premises are currently occupied for the construction of public rental
housing, which would have a 5m height lift lobby on the ground floor. First
assessment height is therefore considered at 5mAG |
[4] The assessment results are for indication
only as there are no air sensitive uses when the Yau Lee CBP is in operation.
Short-term Assessment (Tier 2)
A more focused Tier 2 assessment has
been conducted such that the projected 30% active works areas for the adjacent
construction site is positioned closest to the potentially worst affected ASRs,
while emission from all the other sites remain at 100% as per Tier 1. As
mentioned in Section 7.5.4, the Tier
2 assessment is also very conservative and would over predict the dust
emissions that would unlikely occur.
The maximum 1-hour and 24-hour TSP
concentrations at the ASRs highlighted in Tier 1 have been assessed. Table 7.11 summaries
the cumulative 1-hour and 24-hour TSP impact (Tier 2) at the Residential
Premises near Kai Tak Station (KAT-P1-5). Results show that, the cumulative
1-hour and 24-hour TSP concentrations would comply with the respective criteria
and as such, adverse short-term construction dust impact is not anticipated.
Contours have been plotted for
1-hour (Tier 2), and 24-hour (Tier 2) TSP concentrations at 1.5m and 5m above
ground near the KAT Station to illustrate the short-term dust impact on the hot
spot area at the worst affected level(s) of ASR, as presented in Figures 7.2.5 – 7.2.8
respectively. It is indicated in these figures that there are no active air
sensitive uses located within the area of exceedance, and hence adverse
short-term dust impact is not anticipated in the identified hot spot areas.
Table 7.11: Tier 2 Assessment - Predicted Mitigated Cumulative 1-hour & 24-hour
TSP Concentrations at various heights above Ground (including background
concentration of 75.2μg/m3)
|
ASR ID |
Location |
1-hour
TSP Concentrations at Various Height(μg/m3) |
24-hour
TSP Concentrations at Various Height(μg/m3) |
||||||||
|
1.5m |
5m |
10m |
15m |
20m |
1.5m |
5m |
10m |
15m |
20m |
||
|
KAT-P1-5 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
Note [1] |
360 |
212 |
169 |
147 |
Note [1] |
151 |
119 |
104 |
97 |
Notes:
[1] No
air sensitive use is observed at such levels –
|
Residential
premises near Kai Tak Station (KAT-P1-5): |
These residential
premises are currently occupied for the construction of public rental housing,
which would have a 5m height lift lobby on the ground floor. First assessment
height is therefore considered at 5mAG. The assessment results are for
indication only as there are air sensitive uses when the Yau Lee CBP is in
operation. |
Long-term Assessment
The maximum predicted annual TSP concentrations at identified ASRs in the study area are given in Table 7.12. In summary, the predicted annual TSP concentrations would comply with the criterion of 80µg/m3, hence, there is no adverse long-term impact anticipated. Contours of annual TSP concentrations at 1.5m above ground have also been plotted in Figures 7.2.9-10. Results indicate full compliances of the relevant criteria predicted at all area adjacent to the work sites.
Table 7.12: Long-term Assessment - Predicted Mitigated Cumulative
Annual TSP Concentrations at various heights above Ground
(including background concentration of 75.2μg/m3)
|
ASR ID |
Location |
Annual
TSP Concentrations at various height(μg/m3) |
||||
|
1.5m |
5m |
10m |
15m |
20m |
||
|
DIH-5-1 |
Rainbow Home |
75.5 |
75.5 |
75.4 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
|
DIH-5-2 |
Residential premises |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
|
DIH-5-5 |
Our Lady’s Kindergarten |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
|
DIH 6-1 |
Wong Tai Sin Fire Station and Quarters Block A |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
|
DIH-7-1 |
|
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
|
DIH-7-2 |
|
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
|
DIH-8-1 |
|
75.6 |
75.6 |
75.5 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
|
DIH-9-1 |
Shek On Building |
75.9 |
75.8 |
75.7 |
75.6 |
75.5 |
|
DIH-10-1 |
Hong Kong Sheung Keung Hui Nursing Home |
75.9 |
75.9 |
75.7 |
75.6 |
75.5 |
|
DIH-11-1 |
Lung |
76.0 |
75.5 |
75.4 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
|
DIH-12-1 |
Galaxia Tower B |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
|
DIH-12-2 |
Galaxia Tower E |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
|
DIH-13-1 |
|
75.7 |
75.7 |
75.6 |
75.5 |
75.5 |
|
DIH-14-1 |
|
75.5 |
75.5 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
|
DIH-14-2 |
|
75.6 |
75.6 |
75.5 |
75.5 |
75.4 |
|
DIH-14-3 |
|
75.8 |
75.7 |
75.6 |
75.5 |
75.4 |
|
DIH-14-4 |
|
75.6 |
75.6 |
75.5 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
|
DIH-14-5 |
|
75.5 |
75.5 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.3 |
|
DIH-14-6 |
|
75.5 |
75.5 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
|
DIH-15-1 |
Choi Hung Estate - Kam Wan House |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.3 |
|
DIH-15-2 |
Choi Hung Estate - Pik Hoi House |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
|
DIH-17-1 |
Chuk Yuen United Village |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
|
DIH-25-1 |
Football Field in |
75.7 |
75.7 |
75.6 |
75.5 |
75.4 |
|
DIH-26-1 |
|
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.4 |
75.3 |
75.3 |
|
KAT-1-1 |
|
76.4 |
76.4 |
76.2 |
76.0 |
75.8 |
|
HOM-3-1 |
|
76.0 |
76.1 |
76.1 |
76.0 |
75.9 |
|
HOM-3-2 |
|
76.0 |
76.1 |
76.1 |
76.2 |
76.1 |
|
HOM-4-1 |
Yee Fu Building |
76.0 |
76.1 |
76.1 |
76.3 |
76.3 |
|
HOM-5-1 |
|
76.2 |
76.3 |
76.5 |
76.8 |
76.7 |
|
HUH-1-1 |
|
76.5 |
76.5 |
76.4 |
76.4 |
76.4 |
|
HUH-1-2 |
Lok Ka House |
76.8 |
76.4 |
76.2 |
76.2 |
76.1 |
|
HUH-1-3 |
|
77.1 |
76.4 |
76.1 |
76.0 |
75.9 |
|
HUH-2-1 |
|
77.1 |
76.7 |
76.2 |
75.9 |
75.7 |
|
HUH-3-1 |
|
76.1 |
76.1 |
75.9 |
75.8 |
75.7 |
|
HUH-4-1 |
The |
75.8 |
75.9 |
75.8 |
75.7 |
75.6 |
|
HUH-5-1 |
|
76.8 |
76.6 |
76.3 |
76.0 |
75.8 |
|
HUH-6-1 |
HK |
78.3 |
78.2 |
77.7 |
77.1 |
76.6 |
|
HUH-7-1 |
Hotel Nikko |
77.6 |
77.5 |
77.1 |
76.6 |
76.3 |
|
HUH-9-1 |
|
Note [3] |
Note [3] |
76.0 |
75.8 |
75.7 |
|
HUH-10-1 |
Harbourfront Horizon |
Note [3] |
78.1 |
76.9 |
76.3 |
75.9 |
|
HUH-11-1 |
|
76.9 |
76.3 |
75.9 |
75.8 |
75.7 |
|
KAT-P1-1 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [1] |
||||
|
KAT-P1-2 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [1] |
||||
|
KAT-P1-3 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [2] |
||||
|
KAT-P1-4 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [2] |
||||
|
KAT-P1-5 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station [4] |
Note [3] |
76.6 |
76.0 |
75.8 |
75.6 |
|
KAT-P1-6 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station [4] |
Note [3] |
78.2 |
78.3 |
78.4 |
78.1 |
|
KAT-P1-7 |
Residential premises near Kai Tak Station |
See Note [2] |
||||
|
KAT-P2-1 |
Public Housing Development at ex-San |
76.2 |
76.1 |
75.8 |
75.7 |
75.5 |
|
HOM-P2 |
Proposed Dormitory for HKPU |
76.0 |
76.0 |
76.1 |
76.1 |
76.0 |
Notes:
Values
which exceeded AQO are shown as bolded characters
[1] The
population intake of this project would be after Year 2016 (Referenced from
approved Kai Tak Development EIA Report), and hence there are no cumulative
construction dust impact from the projects
[2] The premises is located within the works site
boundary, hence the population intake would be after the construction of the
Project i.e. no impact from the Project
[3] No air sensitive use is observed at such
levels –
|
|
Air sensitive use is
on the podium of the HUH station, which is at least 10mAG. First assessment
height is therefore considered at 10mAG. |
|
Harbourfront
Horizon (HUH-10-1): |
The first floor of
residential units is situated on the podium, which is at least 5m above
ground. First assessment height is therefore considered at 5mAG. |
|
Residential
premises near Kai Tak Station (KAT-P1-5 / KAT-P1-6): |
These residential
premises are currently occupied for the construction of public rental
housing, which would have a 5m height lift lobby on the ground floor. First
assessment height is therefore considered at 5mAG |
[4] The
assessment results are for indication only as there are no air sensitive uses
when the Yau Lee CBP is in operation.
7.5.8
Residual
Impacts for Fugitive Dust
With the implementation of the mitigation measures as stipulated in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation, dust control measures and good site practices, the predicted 1-hour, 24-hour and annual TSP concentrations on area in the vicinity of the construction sites would comply with the relevant criteria. Hence, no adverse residual dust impact is anticipated.
An
air quality impact assessment has been conducted for construction of Project.
The fugitive dust assessment for the construction has concluded that watering
in all works areas once per hour during working hours (7:00am – 7:00pm) would
be required to control the fugitive dust impact. In addition, the Contractor is
also recommended to adopt good site practices and is required to follow the
procedures and requirements given in the Air Pollution Control (Construction
Dust) Regulation.
Potential
dust impact would be generated from the soil excavation activities,
backfilling, site erosion, storage of spoil on site, and transportation of soil
during the construction phase. Quantitative fugitive dust assessments have been
conducted.
The results
show that, in general, the predicted 1-hour and 24-hour and annual TSP
concentrations at identified ASRs would comply with the respective criteria.
Hence, it is concluded that there will not be any adverse residual air quality
impacts.