8
Airborne Noise Impact Assessment
This chapter presents the findings
of the airborne noise assessment for the SCL
(TAW-HUH) during both the construction and
operational phases. Construction noise associated with the use of Powered
Mechanical Equipment (PME) has been conducted. With the implementation of
practical mitigation measures, construction noise impacts at most of the
neighbouring noise sensitive uses would be controlled to acceptable
levels. However, for some receivers that
are very close to some of the works sites, residual impacts are anticipated
even after implementing all practicable mitigation measures.
Operational noise impacts associated
with fixed noise sources and railways have also been investigated. With the
implementation of mitigation measures, potential noise impacts would comply
with the statutory criteria.
8.2.1
Construction Noise
The
Noise Control Ordinance (NCO) (Cap. 400)[8-1]
provides the statutory framework for noise control in
·
TM
on Noise from Construction Work other than Percussive Piling (TM-GW)[8-2];
·
TM
on Noise from Percussive Piling (TM-PP)[8-3]; and
·
TM
on Noise on Construction Work in Designated Areas (TM-DA)[8-4].
To
ensure a better environment, the TM-EIAO[8-5]
promulgated under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) (Cap.
499) has imposed more stringent criteria.
For construction, there is no statutory limit on daytime construction
noise under the NCO and related TMs.
Nevertheless, the TM-EIAO stipulates noise standards of 65 - 75dB(A) for daytime construction activities, as shown Table 8.1.
Table 8.1: Noise
Standards for Construction Activities
Uses |
Noise Standards
[1] ,
Leq (30 mins)
dB(A) |
|
0700 to 1900 hours on any day
not being a Sunday or general holiday |
1900 to 0700 hours or any time on Sundays or general holiday |
|
All
domestic premises including temporary housing accommodation |
75 |
(See Note 2) |
Hotels
and hostels |
75 |
|
Educational
institutions including kindergartens, nurseries and all others where unaided
voice communication is required |
70 65 (During
examinations) |
Notes:
[1] The above standards apply to uses that rely on opened windows
for ventilation.
[2] The criteria laid down in the relevant technical memoranda
under the NCO for designated areas and construction works other than percussive
piling may be used for planning purpose. A Construction Noise Permit (CNP)
shall be required for the carrying out construction work during the period.
8.2.2
Construction Noise during Restricted Hours
The
NCO also provides statutory control on general construction works during
restricted hours (ie 1900 to 0700 hours (of the next
day) from Monday to Saturday and at any time on Sundays or public
holidays). The use of Powered Mechanical
Equipment (PME) for construction works during restricted hours would require a
Construction Noise Permit (CNP). The TM-GW
details the procedures adopted by EPD for assessing such application. The granting of a CNP is subject to
conditions stated in the CNP and it may be revoked at any time for failure to
comply with the permit conditions.
In
addition to the general controls on the use of PME during restricted hours, the
use of Specified Powered Mechanical Equipment (SPME) and the undertaking of
Prescribed Construction Work (PCW) during the restricted hours in a designated
area are controlled by the TM-DA.
Construction plant or equipment classified as SPME under the TM-DA
includes hand-held breakers, bulldozers, concrete mixer lorries,
dump trucks and poker vibrators. The PCW
includes the erection or dismantling of formwork or scaffolding, hammering,
handling of rubble, wooden boards, steel bars, or scaffolding material, and the
disposal of rubble through plastic chutes.
The
TM-DA details the procedures that should generally be adopted by the Authority
for assessing the use of SPME during restricted hours and for determining
whether a CNP would be issued.
Maximum
noise levels from construction activities during restricted hours at affected
NSRs are controlled under the TMs and shall not exceed the specified Acceptable
Noise Levels (ANLs). These ANLs are stipulated in accordance with the Area
Sensitivity Ratings established for the NSRs.
The ANLs for construction works in Designated Areas are more stringent
than those given in the GW-TM and summarised in Table 8.2.
Table 8.2: Acceptable Noise Levels for Construction during Restricted
Hours
Time Period |
Acceptable Noise Levels for Area Sensitivity Ratings, dB(A) |
||
A |
B |
C |
|
All
weekdays during the evening (1900 to 2300 hours), and general holidays
(including Sundays) during the day and evening (0700 to 2300 hours) |
60 (45) |
65 (50) |
70 (55) |
All
days during the night-time (2300 to 0700 hours) |
45 (30) |
50 (35) |
55 (40) |
Note: Figures in brackets
are ANLs for SPME construction work in designated areas
Despite any
description made in this EIA, there is no guarantee that a CNP will be issued for
the project construction. The Noise
Control Authority will consider a well-justified CNP application, once filed,
for construction works within restricted hours as guided by the relevant TMs
issued under the NCO. The Noise Control Authority will take into account
contemporary conditions / situations of adjoining land uses and any previous
complaints against construction activities at the site before making a decision
in granting a CNP. Nothing in the EIA
report shall bind the Noise Control Authority in making a decision. If a CNP is
to be issued, the Noise Control Authority shall include in it any conditions
demand. Failure to comply with any such
conditions will lead to cancellation of the CNP and prosecution under the NCO.
8.2.3
Percussive Piling
Under
the TM-PP, CNPs are also required for percussive piling involving the use of
diesel, pneumatic and / or steam hammer. This TM specifies the permitted hours
and other conditions for percussive piling.
Table 8.3
lists the acceptable percussive piling noise levels for various types of NSR.
Table
8.3: Acceptable Noise Levels for Percussive Piling
NSR Window Type or Means of Ventilation |
ANL (dB(A)) |
(i) NSR (or part
of NSR) with no window or other opening |
100 |
(ii) NSR with central air conditioning system. |
90 |
(iii) NSR with windows or other openings but
without central air conditioning system |
85 |
Depending
on the numbers and types of piling machines and the separation from NSRs, percussive
piling may be restricted to 12, 5 or 3 hours per day. For NSRs that are particularly sensitive to
noise, such as hospitals, medical clinics, educational institutions and courts
of law, a further reduction of 10 dB(A) shall be applied to the above ANLs.
8.2.4
Blasting
The
administrative and procedural control of all blasting operations in Hong Kong
is vested in the Mines Division of the Civil Engineering and Development
Department (CEDD). The Dangerous Goods
(General) Regulations, Chapter 295 also stipulates that no person shall carry
out blasting unless he possesses a valid mine blasting certificate to be issued
by the Mines Division of CEDD. The
Superintendent of Mines will review the application on a case-by-case basis
before issuing the Mine Blasting Certificate.
Although there is no statutory noise level for blasting, the noise
associated with the removal of debris and rocks are controlled under the
TM-EIAO.
8.2.5
Operational Noise
The
TM-EIAO has stipulated the noise standards for various noise sources as shown
in the following table.
Table 8.4 Noise Standards for Operational
Phase
|
Noise Standards [1] |
||||
Common Uses |
Aircraft Noise (Noise Exposure Forecast: NEF) |
Helicopter
Noise Lmax
dB(A) |
Road Traffic Noise L10 (1hour) dB(A) |
Rail Noise[2] |
Fixed Noise
Sources |
All
domestic premises including temporary housing accommodation |
25 |
85 |
70 |
(a)
The appropriate Acceptable Noise Levels shown in Table 2 of the Technical
Memorandum for the Assessment of Noise from Places Other than Domestic
Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites (b) Lmax
(2300-0700 hours) =
85dB(A) and (c) Leq 24hrs
=65dB(A) |
(a)
5dB(A) below the appropriate Acceptable Noise Levels (ANL) shown in Table 2
of the Technical Memorandum for the Assessment of Noise from Places Other
than Domestic Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites, or (b) the prevailing background noise levels (For quiet
areas with level 5 dB(A) below the ANL)
|
Hotels
and hostels |
25 |
85 |
70 |
||
Offices |
30 |
90 |
70 |
||
Educational
institutions including kindergartens, nurseries and all others where unaided
voice communication is required |
25 |
85 |
65 |
||
Places
of public worship and courts of law |
25 |
85 |
65 |
||
Hospitals,
clinics, convalescences and homes for the aged, diagnostic rooms, wards |
25 |
85 |
55 |
Notes:
[1] The above standards apply to uses
that rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] Rail noise is under the
control of the Noise Control Ordinance and shall comply with the Acceptable
Noise Levels laid down in the Technical Memorandum for the Assessment of Noise
from Places other than Domestic Premises, Public Places or Construction
Sites. The criteria for noise
transmitted primarily through the structural elements of the building or
buildings should be 10dB(A) less than the relevant
acceptable noise level.
8.2.6 Railway Noise
Noise from railway, station plant items,
train stabling sidings and ventilation building is controlled under the NCO and
the associated Technical Memorandum on Noise from Places Other Than Domestic
Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites (TM-Places), and the relevant
noise criteria are listed in Table 1A, Annex 5 of TM-EIAO. In accordance with
the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG), a 24-hour averaged
noise level of 65 dB(A) Leq
24 hr has been specified.
Table 8.5 below
summarises the noise standards for railway noise as given in Table 1A, Annex 5
of TM-EIAO.
Table 8.5: Noise criteria for railway noise
Area
Sensitivity Rating |
Time
Period [1] |
Acceptable Noise Levels
(ANL), LAeq, 30 mins, dB(A)
|
Maximum
A-weighted sound pressure level, Lmax
(2300-0700hrs) dB(A) |
A |
Day & evening |
60 |
85 |
Night |
50 |
||
B |
Day & evening |
65 |
|
Night |
55 |
||
C |
Day & evening |
70 |
|
Night |
60 |
Note:
[1] Day: 0700 to 1900 hours, Evening:
1900 to 2300 hours, Night: 2300 to 0700 hours
8.2.7
Fixed Noise Sources
Operational
noise from fixed noise sources is controlled under the NCO’s Technical
Memorandum on Noise from Places other than Domestic Premises, Public Places or
Construction Sites[8-6]. To plan for a better environment, the TM-EIAO
has specified the following requirements.
·
5
dB(A) below the appropriate ANLs in the Technical Memorandum on Noise from
Places other than Domestic Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites; or
·
the existing noise levels (For quiet areas with
level 5dB(A) below the ANL).
The
ANLs for different Area Sensitivity Ratings during different periods are
summarized in the following table.
Table 8.6: Acceptable Noise Levels
(ANL) for Fixed Noise Sources
Time
Period |
ANL,
dB(A) |
ANL-5,
dB(A) |
||||
ASR
A |
ASR
B |
ASR
C |
ASR
A |
ASR
B |
ASR
C |
|
Day
(0700 to 1900 hours) |
60 |
65 |
70 |
55 |
60 |
65 |
Evening
(1900 to 2300 hours) |
60 |
65 |
70 |
55 |
60 |
65 |
Night
(2300 to 0700 hours) |
50 |
55 |
60 |
45 |
50 |
55 |
Note: ASR
– Area Sensitivity Rating
8.2.8
Existing Noise Levels
Noise measurements
have been conducted to establish the existing noise levels in the vicinity of
the proposed ventilation buildings and stations where fixed noise sources are anticipated.
Appendix
8.1 shows the measurement locations for existing noise levels. A summary of the results is given in Table 8.7.
Table 8.7: Measurements of Existing Noise Levels
Measurement Location |
Existing Noise Levels [2], dB(A) L eq |
|
Day & Evening [1] |
Night [1] |
|
Ma Chai Hang-MCV (PNM-1) |
69 - 71 |
56 - 59 |
Ma Chai Hang-MCV (PNM-2) |
66 - 68 |
58 - 61 |
Hin Keng-HIK (PNM-3) |
58 - 65 |
50 - 53 |
Hin Keng-HIK (PNM-4) |
58 - 62 |
56 - 58 |
Diamond Hill-DIH (PNM-5) |
69 - 73 |
62 - 65 |
Diamond Hill-DIH (PNM-6) |
76 - 79 |
71 - 73 |
Diamond Hill-DIH (PNM-7) |
72 - 74 |
63 - 66 |
Kai Tak-KAT (PNM-8) |
70 – 73 |
56 - 59 |
To Kwa Wan-TKW (PNM-9) |
66 - 68 |
61 - 63 |
Ma Tau Wai-MTW (PNM-10)
|
69 – 71 |
56 – 58 |
Ma Tau Wai-MTW (PNM-11)
|
70 – 71 |
65 - 68 |
Fung Tak EA/EEA (PNM-12) |
58 - 63 |
55 - 60 |
[1] Day: 0700 to 1900 hours, Evening:
1900 to 2300 hours, Night: 2300 to 0700 hours
[2] Measurements conducted in
March 2009
8.2.9
Noise Criteria
A summary of the noise criteria at representative NSRs which would be
subject to the impact of fixed plant noise is given in the following table. The
existing noise level at each NSR would be determined based on measurement
results at the nearest location as shown in Appendix
8.1.
Table 8.8: Summary of Noise Criteria at NSRs
for Fixed Noise Sources
Area (NSR No.) |
Time Period [1] |
Existing Noise Levels, dB(A) [2] |
ASR |
ANL-5 dB(A) [3] |
Criteria dB(A) [4] |
Wang King House (DIH-21-1), Chun On House (DIH-23-1) |
Day & evening |
69 |
B |
60 |
60 |
Night |
56 |
B |
50 |
50 |
|
Baptist Rainbow Primary School (DIH-20-1), Carbo
Anglo-Chinese Kindergarten (DIH-4-2) |
Day & evening |
66 |
B |
60 |
60 |
Night |
58 |
B |
50 |
50 |
|
L Louey (TAW-5-2) |
Day & evening |
58 |
B |
60 |
58 |
Night |
50 |
B |
50 |
50 |
|
Joyville
(TAW-5-3) |
Day & evening |
58 |
B |
60 |
58 |
Night |
50 |
B |
50 |
50 |
|
Hin Yau House (TAW-6-5) |
Day & evening |
58 |
B |
60 |
58 |
Night |
56 |
B |
50 |
50 |
|
Galaxia
(DIH-12-1 & DIH-12-2), Lung Wan House (DIH-11-1), Planned NSR (DIH-P2-16 to DIH-P2-24) |
Day & evening |
69 |
C |
65 |
65 |
Night |
62 |
C |
55 |
55 |
|
Shek On Building(DIH-9-1), Hong Kong Sheng
Kung Hui Nursing Home (DIH-10-1), Planned NSR
(DIH-P2-14 to
DIH-P2-15) |
Day & evening |
76 |
B |
60 |
60 |
Night |
71 |
B |
50 |
50 |
|
Canossa Primary School (San Po Kong) (DIH-14-4) |
Day & evening |
72 |
C |
65 |
65 |
Night |
63 |
C |
55 |
55 |
|
Rhythm Garden Block 1 (DIH-14-5), Planned NSR (DIH-P2-11 to DIH-P2-13) |
Day & evening |
72 |
C |
65 |
65 |
Night |
63 |
C |
55 |
55 |
|
Chui Yuen House (DIH-3-4), Rainbow Home (DIH-5-1), Wong Tai Sin
Temple (DIH-16-1), Chuk Yuen United Village
(DIH-17-1) |
Day & evening |
58 |
B |
60 |
58 |
Night |
55 |
B |
50 |
50 |
|
Planned NSR (KAT-P1-1,
KAT-P1-2, KAT-P1-3 & KAT-P1-4) |
Day & evening |
70 |
B |
60 |
60 |
Night |
56 |
B |
50 |
50 |
|
Parc 22
(TKW-1-1), Holy Trinity Church (MTW-19-1), Fok On Building (MTW-6-1) |
Day & evening |
66 |
C |
65 |
65 |
Night |
61 |
C |
55 |
55 |
|
Planned NSR (TKW-P1-1) |
Day & evening |
66 |
B |
60 |
60 |
Night |
61 |
B |
50 |
50 |
|
Prince Ritz (TKW-3-1), Prosperity House (TKW-3-2) |
Day & evening |
67 |
B |
60 |
60 |
Night |
61 |
B |
50 |
50 |
|
Lucky Mansion (MTW-12-3), 352-354 Ma Tau Wai Rd (MTW-12-4), Lucky
Building (MTW-12-10), SKH Good Shepherd Primary School (MTW-16-1) |
Day & evening |
69 |
B |
60 |
60 |
Night |
56 |
B |
50 |
50 |
|
Seng Cheong
Building (MTW-12-5), Loyal Mansion (MTW-17-1), Residential premises along Chi
Kiang Street (MTW-18-1) |
Day & evening |
70 |
B |
60 |
60 |
Night |
65 |
B |
50 |
50 |
Note:
[1] Day: 0700 to 1900 hours,
Evening: 1900 to 2300 hours, Night: 2300 to 0700 hours.
[2] Existing noise
level determined based on the measurement result recorded at the representative
location nearest to the respective NSR.
[3] A 5 dB(A) has been deducted from ANL as specified in requirement
of TM-EIAO.
[4] The Minimum of [2]
& [3] is adopted.
The concurrent projects that would have
cumulative environmental impacts during the construction and operational phases
of SCL (TAW-HUH) are given in Section 1.
As discussed in Section 1.5.12, the
following concurrent projects are relevant for cumulative noise
assessment.
Table 8.9 Summary of Cumulative Noise Issues from
Concurrent Projects
Item |
Project
(Construction Method) |
Issues
During Project Stage |
|
Construction |
Operation |
||
1 |
SCL (MKK-HUH) & SCL (HUH-ADM) (cut-&-cover
tunnel) |
•
Airborne noise |
•
Groundborne noise |
2 |
Central
Kowloon Route (CKR)[1] (at-grade
road construction) |
•
Airborne noise |
•
Nil |
3 |
Housing Authority Development Sites 1A & 1B within Kai Tak
Development (superstructure
construction) |
|
•
Nil |
4 |
Other Infrastructure within Kai Tak Development (Including EPIW) |
•
Nil |
|
5 |
Kwun Tong Line Extension (Including EPIW) (cut-&-cover
station and tunnel) |
•
Airborne noise |
•
Groundborne noise |
6 |
MTR Tsz Wan Shan Wan Shan Pedestrian Link |
•
Airborne noise |
•
Nil |
Notes:
[1] The construction programme of CKR will
be concurrent with SCL (TAW-HUH). However, the cumulative construction impacts
are obstructed by nearby building of the construction sites. Therefore,
cumulative construction noise impacts are not anticipated.
8.3.1
Noise Sensitive Receivers
With
reference to Annex 13 of the TM-EIAO, NSRs include residential uses (all
domestic premises including temporary housing), institutional uses (educational
institutions including kindergarten and nurseries), hospitals, medical clinics,
homes for the aged, convalescent homes, places of worship, libraries, court of
law, performing arts centres, auditoria and amphitheatres, country park and
others. All hospitals and performance venues are air-conditioned and do not
rely on openable windows for ventilation.
Representative
NSRs within a distance of 300m from the either side of the project boundary
have been identified. The first layer of NSRs has been identified and selected
for assessment. These
NSRs will cover all
existing sensitive developments (including those occupied before completion of
the construction) for construction noise assessment, and both the existing and planned developments for operational noise assessment.
The
existing NSRs are identified by means of topographic maps, aerial photos, land status plans and several site surveys. Planned/committed NSRs are identified by
making reference to relevant Outline Zoning Plans, Outline Development Plans,
Layout Plans and other published plans in relation to the Planning and
Development.
The
existing and planned NSRs in the vicinity, which may be affected by the
proposed SCL (TAW-HUH) are summarised in the following Table 8.10 and Table 8.11. The locations of the NSRs are
shown on Figures 8.1.1 to 8.1.14. Details and photos of NSRs
are given in Appendices 8.2 and 8.2A
respectively.
Table
8.10: Existing NSRs
NSR ID |
NSR
Description |
Landuse [1] |
No. of
Storey |
TAW-1-1 |
Carado Garden
Block 6 |
R |
28 |
TAW-2-1 |
Shatin
Heights |
R |
7 |
TAW-3-1 |
K K Terrace |
R |
3 |
TAW-4-1 |
Woodcrest
Hill Block 2&3 |
R |
2 |
TAW-5-1 |
Chan’s
Garden |
R |
2 |
TAW-5-2 |
L Louey |
R |
2 |
TAW-5-3 |
Joyville |
R |
2 |
TAW-6-1 |
Hin Keng Estate - Hin Yiu House |
R |
34 |
TAW-6-2 |
Carmel
Alison Lam Primary School |
E |
7 |
TAW
6-3 |
Hin Keng Estate - Hin Tak House |
R |
34 |
TAW
6-4 |
Hin Keng Estate - Hin Yeung House |
R |
34 |
TAW
6-5 |
Hin Keng Estate - Hin Yau House |
R |
35 |
TAW
6-6 |
Hin Keng Estate - Hin Kwai House |
R |
35 |
TAW
6-7 |
C.U.H.K.A.A.
Thomas Cheung School |
E |
6 |
TAW-6-8 |
Hin Keng Estate – Hin Wan House |
R |
35 |
TAW-7-1 |
Kam Cheong
Building |
R |
5 |
TAW-8-1 |
Grandway Garden
Block 2 |
R |
24 |
TAW-9-1 |
Christian
Alliance Cheng Wing Gee College |
E |
6 |
TAW-10-1 |
Holford Garden - Fook Siu Court |
R |
25 |
DIH-1-1 |
Tsui Chuk Garden Block 5 |
R |
22 |
DIH
2-1 |
Chuk Yuen North
Estate – Pak Yuen House |
R |
34 |
DIH-3-1 |
Chuk Yuen South
Estate – Wah Yuen House |
R |
18 |
DIH-3-2 |
Chuk Yuen South
Estate – Nga Yuen House |
R |
18 |
DIH-3-3 |
Chuk Yuen South
Estate – Kwai Yuen House |
R |
18 |
DIH-3-4 |
Chuk Yuen South
Estate – Chui Yuen House |
R |
18 |
DIH-4-1 |
Pang Ching
Court |
R |
34 |
DIH-4-2 |
Carbo
Anglo-Chinese Kindergarten |
E |
2 |
DIH-5-1 |
Rainbow Home
|
R |
11 |
DIH-5-2 |
Residential
premises |
R |
6 |
DIH-5-5 |
Our Lady’s
Kindergarten |
E |
2 |
DIH
6-1 |
Wong Tai Sin
Fire Station and Quarters Block A |
R |
34 |
DIH-7-1 |
Tropicana
Gardens Block 2 |
R |
25 |
DIH-7-2 |
Tropicana
Garden Block 3 |
R |
25 |
DIH-8-1 |
Redemption
Lutheran Church |
W |
3 |
DIH-9-1 |
Shek On
Building |
E
+ W |
5 |
DIH-10-1 |
Hong Kong Sheung Keung Hui Nursing Home |
H |
9 |
DIH-11-1 |
Lung Poon
Court – Lung Wan House |
R |
34 |
DIH-12-1 |
Galaxia Tower B |
R |
44 |
DIH-12-2 |
Galaxia Tower E |
R |
43 |
DIH-13-1 |
Canossa
Primary School |
E |
5 |
DIH-14-1 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 2 |
R |
22 |
DIH-14-2 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 5 |
R |
22 |
DIH-14-3 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 8 |
R |
22 |
DIH-14-4 |
Canossa
Primary School (San Po Kong) |
E |
6 |
DIH-14-5 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 1 |
R |
22 |
DIH-14-6 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 3 |
R |
22 |
DIH-15-1 |
Choi Hung Estate - Kam Wan House |
R |
20 |
DIH-15-2 |
Choi Hung Estate – Kam Pik House |
R |
6 |
DIH-15-2-A |
Choi Hung
Estate - Pik Hoi House |
R |
20 |
DIH-16-1 |
Wong Tai Sin
Temple |
W |
1 |
DIH-17-1 |
Chuk Yuen United
Village |
R |
1-3 |
DIH-18-1 |
Upper Wong
Tai Sin Estate - Po Sin House |
R |
34 |
DIH-18-2 |
Upper Wong Tai Sin Estate - Tat Sin House |
R |
34 |
DIH-19-1 |
Lung Cheung Government Secondary School |
E |
5 |
DIH-20-1 |
Baptist
Rainbow Primary School |
E |
7 |
DIH-21-1 |
Tin Wang
Court - Wang King House |
R |
21 |
DIH-22-1 |
Price
Memorial Catholic Primary School |
E |
7 |
DIH-23-1 |
Tin Ma Court
- Chun On House |
R |
37 |
DIH-24-1 |
Shing Wong Temple |
W |
1 |
TKW-1-1 |
Parc 22 |
R |
11 |
TKW-1-2 |
Sanford
Mansion |
R |
14 |
TKW-2-1 |
Skytower Tower 1 |
R |
47 |
TKW-2-2 |
Skytower Tower 2 |
R |
47 |
TKW-2-3 |
Skytower Tower 7 |
R |
47 |
TKW-3-1 |
Prince Ritz |
R |
29 |
TKW-3-2 |
Prosperity
House |
R |
3 |
TKW-4-1 |
No. 26 Hok Ling Street |
R |
4 |
TKW-5-1 |
No. 37 – 39, Sa Po Road |
R |
5 |
MTW-6-1 |
Fok On
Building |
R |
11 |
MTW-6-2 |
Hong Kong
Society for the Protection of Children |
R |
4 |
MTW-6-3 |
Chung Nam
Mansion |
R |
10 |
MTW-6-4 |
Pok Oi Lau |
R |
6 |
MTW-7-1 |
Ma Tau Wai Estate - Geranium House |
R |
13 |
MTW-8-1 |
Horae Place |
R |
17 |
MTW-9-1 |
Majestic
Park |
R |
18 |
MTW-10-1 |
18 Farm Road |
R |
42 |
MTW-11-1 |
Farm Road
Government Primary School |
E |
3 |
MTW-12-1 |
Yuet Fai Mansion
|
R |
10 |
MTW-12-2 |
Delight
Court |
R |
21 |
MTW-12-3 |
Lucky
Mansion |
R |
14 |
MTW-12-4 |
352-354 Ma Tau Wai Rd (East Façade) |
R |
8 |
MTW-12-4-1 |
352-354 Ma
Tau Wai Rd (North Façade) |
R |
8 |
MTW-12-5 |
Seng Cheong
Building |
R |
10 |
MTW-12-6 |
Great Wall
Building |
R |
11 |
MTW-12-7 |
197-199 Ma
Tau Wai Rd |
R |
6 |
MTW-12-8 |
Pak Tai
Mansion |
R |
8 |
MTW-12-9 |
Residential
premises along Hung Kwong Street |
R |
8 |
MTW-12-10 |
Lucky
Building (South Façade) |
R |
18 |
MTW-12-10-1 |
Lucky
Building (East Façade) |
R |
18 |
MTW-12-11 |
Jing Ming
Building |
R |
5 |
MTW-13-1 |
Cheung Chuk Shan Memorial School |
E |
3 |
MTW-14-1 |
Po Leung Kuk Lam Man Chan English Primary School |
E |
3 |
MTW-15-1 |
Hung Hom Lutheran Primary School |
E |
4 |
MTW-16-1 |
SKH Good
Shepherd Primary School |
E |
5 |
MTW-17-1 |
Loyal
Mansion |
R |
14 |
MTW-18-1 |
Residential
premises along Chi Kiang Street |
R |
5 |
MTW-18-2 |
No. 2
Kowloon City Road |
R |
5 |
MTW-19-1 |
Holy Trinity
Church |
W |
1 |
HOM-1-1 |
Ko Shan
Theatre |
P |
3 |
HOM-2-1 |
Faerie Court
(North Façade) |
R |
26 |
HOM-2-1A |
Faerie Court
(South Façade) |
R |
26 |
HOM-2-2 |
Lee Wing
Bldg |
R |
22 |
HOM-2-3 |
Wing Lam
Mansion |
R |
23 |
HOM-2-4 |
Tak Lee
Court |
R |
24 |
HOM-2-5 |
Chat Ma
Mansion |
R |
8 |
HOM-2-6 |
Chatham
Mansion |
R |
9 |
HOM-3-1 |
Fook Sing
Mansion |
R |
18 |
HOM-3-2 |
Marigold
Mansion Block A |
R |
20 |
HOM-4-1 |
Yee Fu
Building |
R |
25 |
HOM-5-1 |
271 Chatham
Road North |
R |
5 |
HUH-1-1 |
Cartas Branchi College of Careers |
E |
14 |
HUH-1-2 |
Lok Ka House |
R |
7 |
HUH-1-3 |
Wing Fung
Building |
R |
8 |
HUH-3-1 |
Royal
Peninsula Block 2 |
R |
42 |
HUH-4-1 |
The
Metropolis Residence Tower 2[2] |
S |
18 |
HUH-4-2 |
The
Metropolis Residence Tower 1[2] |
S |
18 |
HUH-8-1 |
No. 2, Gillies Avenue South |
R |
6 |
HUH-10-1 |
Harbourfront Horizon[3] |
C
+ S |
22 |
Notes:
[1] R– residential; E – educational; H – clinic/ home for the
aged; W – worship; GIC – government, institution and community; P – performing
arts centres; S – Service Apartment; C – Commercial
[2] Metropolis Residence is a service apartment and shall not
rely on openable windows for ventilation.
Nonetheless, for conservative consideration that occupier might open window
under special circumstances, this premise has been considered as an assessment
point.
[3] Harbourfront Horizon shall not rely
on openable windows for ventilation. Nonetheless, for
conservative consideration that occupier might open window under special
circumstances, this premise has been considered as an assessment point.
Table
8.11: Planned NSRs
NSR
ID |
NSR
Description |
Landuse
[1] |
No.
of Storey |
TAW-P1-1[3] |
Festival
City (Façade facing
Mei Tin Road) |
R |
44 |
TAW-P1-2[3] |
Festival
city (Façade not
facing Mei Tin Road) |
R |
44 |
TAW-P2-1 |
Property
above Tai Wai Station (Façade facing
Mei Tin Road) |
R |
[2] |
DIH-P1-1 |
Upper
Wong Tai Sin Estate Phase 3 |
R |
37 |
DIH-P2-1 to
P2-24 |
Future
receivers in the CDA Site atop the DIH Train Stabling Sidings |
R/GIC |
[2] |
KAT-P1-1 to
7 |
Residential
premises near KAT |
R |
14 -
57 |
TKW-P1-1 |
Residential
premises near TKW |
R |
[2] |
HOM-P2-1 |
HKPU
Student Hostel, Phase 3 |
R |
- |
HOM-P3 |
Residential
Building, HOM Development |
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] Locations
of NSR refer to http://www.ckh.com.hk/eng/index.htm
8.4.1
General Assessment Procedures
Construction noise
assessment has been conducted based on the following procedures:
·
Determine
the assessment area, and identify representative NSRs that may be affected by
the works;
·
Obtain
the construction method and work sequence for the construction period;
·
Obtain
the plant items for each corresponding construction work sequence;
·
Determine
the sound power levels of the plant items according to the information stated
in the TM-GW or other recognised sources of reference, where appropriate;
·
Calculate
the correction factors based on the distance between the NSRs and the notional
noise source positions of the work sites;
·
Apply
corrections for façade, distance, barrier attenuation, acoustic reflection
where applicable;
·
Quantify
the level of impact at the NSRs, in accordance with TM-GW;
·
Predict
the cumulative noise impacts by any concurrent construction works in the
vicinity; and
·
For
any exceedance of noise criteria, all practical mitigation measures such as
alternative construction methodology, quiet plant, silencer, enclosure, etc,
shall be examined to alleviate the predicted noise impacts as much as
practicable. Details of mitigation measures are discussed in Section 8.4.6.
8.4.2
Construction Noise Sources
Based on the
construction methodologies, the major construction works would include the
following activities:
·
Site
clearance and formation activities;
·
Structure
dismantling if required;
·
Station
/ train stabling sidings construction (e.g. diaphragm walls etc);
·
Tunnel
construction (including bored tunnelling, cut-&-cover, open cut etc);
·
Viaduct
construction;
·
Portal
construction;
·
Diversion
of utilities if required;
·
Spoils
removal from underground works & stockpiling;
·
Backfilling
and reinstatement works; and
·
Barging
activities.
These construction
activities would be carried out with the use of Powered Mechanical Equipment
(PME) including breakers, pipe pile rigs, excavators, lorries,
mobile cranes, concrete pumps, concrete mixers, pokers, rollers, etc. Sound Power Levels (SWLs) for each PME would
be established according to TM-GW and other relevant information as
appropriate.
The plant inventory for
the above activities is provided by the Project Proponent and is given in Appendix 8.3.
Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) that would be used for the construction
includes excavators, trucks, hydraulic breakers, concreting equipment etc.
As discussed in Section 3, there is a magazine site in
TKO 137 and a number of off-site storage / office areas. As these areas would have very limited
activities, they would not generate any significant construction noise and
hence they have not been included in the quantitative noise model.
Other than the magazine site in TKO 137 and storage / office areas, there is a number of off-site temporary works areas. The noise from Freight Pier Barging Point has been included in the construction noise assessment. The noise from the Freight Pier at Hung Hom has been estimated by SCL (MKK-HUH) and SCL (HUH-ADM) EIA and had been included in this EIA as cumulative impacts.
All the works associated
with the tunnel blasting (e.g. holes drilling, rock excavation and
loading to lorries, etc) would be conducted
deep inside the tunnel. For the operation of rock crushers in particular, they
would be located typically at about 20 to 30m from the portals inside the
tunnel. Depending on the actual site constraints and logistics during different
construction periods, the associated utilization rate for rock crushers would
be less than 100%. Together with the noise screening effect within the tunnel
shaft and that the NSRs are located at a distance from the shaft (for the
portal at Hin Keng, the
neighbouring NSRs are separated by 80 to 150m; for Ma Chai
Hang construction shaft, the separation distance is about 50 to100m; while for
the shaft at Shansi Street, the separation distance is about 20 to 30m away
from the shaft), adverse construction noise impacts are not anticipated.
8.4.3
Utilisation Rates of Powered Mechanical Equipment
Practically, the PMEs
will not be operating for all times within a work site. The utilization rates would depend on the
construction sequences, work fronts scale and construction nature. In this
assessment, the utilization rates for each work front during different periods
have been reviewed by the Project Proponent and have been concluded to be
practicable for the purpose of this EIA.
Appendix 8.3
summarises the adopted utilisation rates and the associated SWL for different
construction sequences. Appendix 8.3A
shows the sketch of typical temporary noise barrier / enclosure.
8.4.4
Noise Assessment Tool
An in-house program has
been used for construction noise calculations.
Initially, the program runs were conducted without any mitigation
measures (i.e. the “Unmitigated Scenario”).
Where noise level exceedance was identified, further runs would be made
assuming different combinations of mitigation measures to be incorporated (i.e.
the “Mitigated Scenario”).
8.4.5
Assessment Results - Unmitigated Scenario
According to the latest
engineering design, the construction would mainly comprise of the activities as
described in Section 8.4.2. The corresponding Sound Power Levels (SWLs)
of these activities have been estimated according to the PME’s SWLs and the
assessment methodology in the GW-TM. Appendix 8.4
presents the index plan for various concurrent construction activities and the
NSRs locations. Appendices
8.5A to 8.11A present the PME inventory adopted in each construction
works area, including HIK, MCV, DIH, KAT, TKW, MTW, and Chatham Road
North. Appendices
8.5B to 8.11B present the distance between the notional sources and the
NSRs, screening effects due to terrains etc. Appendices
8.5C – 8.11C present the monthly unmitigated noise contribution during
the construction period. Appendices
8.5D to 8.11D
also present the unmitigated construction noise impacts at selected
representative NSRs. The predicted construction noise impacts on the NSRs are
summarised in the tables below.
Table
8.12: Predicted Maximum Unmitigated Construction Noise
Levels at Noise Sensitive Receivers
NSR
ID |
NSR
Description |
Uses |
Criterion [1] dB(A) |
Unmitigated Noise Level [2] dB(A) |
Exceedance dB(A) |
|
Works Area – HIK |
||||||
TAW-5-1 |
Chan’s
Garden |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
|
TAW-5-2 |
L
Louey |
R |
75 |
85 |
10 |
|
TAW-5-3 |
Joyville |
R |
75 |
83 |
8 |
|
TAW-6-4 |
Hin Keng Estate - Hin Yeung
House |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
|
TAW-6-5 |
Hin Keng Estate - Hin Yau
House |
R |
75 |
85 |
10 |
|
TAW-6-6 |
Hin Keng Estate - Hin Kwai
House |
R |
75 |
88 |
13 |
|
TAW-6-7 |
C.U.H.K.A.A.
Thomas Cheung School |
E |
70 (65) |
80 |
10(15) |
|
TAW-6-8 |
Hin Keng Estate – Hin Wan
House |
R |
75 |
89 |
14 |
|
TAW-P1-2 |
Topside
Property above Tai Wai Depot (Façade
not facing Mei Tin Road) |
R |
75 |
72 |
0 |
|
TAW-6-2 |
Carmel
Alison Lam Primary Schhol |
E |
70 (65) |
75 |
5 (10) |
|
Works Area – Ma Chai
Hang Ventilation Building |
||||||
DIH-4-2 |
Carbo Anglo-Chinese
Kindergarten |
E |
70 (65) |
77 |
7(12) |
|
DIH-20-1 |
Baptist
Rainbow Primary School |
E |
70 (65) |
78 |
8(13) |
|
DIH-21-1 |
Tin
Wang Court - Wang King House |
R |
75 |
81 |
6 |
|
DIH-22-1 |
Price
Memorial Catholic Primary School |
E |
70 (65) |
78 |
8(13) |
|
DIH-23-1 |
Tin
Ma Court - Chun On House |
R |
75 |
77 |
2 |
|
Works Area – DIH |
||||||
DIH-3-4 |
Chuk Yuen South
Estate – Chui Yuen House |
R |
75 |
82 |
7 |
|
DIH-5-1 |
Rainbow
Home |
R |
75 |
81 |
6 |
|
DIH-7-1 |
Tropicana
Gardens Block 2 |
R |
75 |
77 |
2 |
|
DIH-9-1 |
Shek
On Building |
E + W |
70 (65) |
87 |
17 (22) |
|
DIH-10-1 |
Hong
Kong Sheung Keung Hui
Nursing Home |
H |
75 |
87 |
12 |
|
DIH-11-1 |
Lung
Poon Court – Lung Wan House |
R |
75 |
87 |
12 |
|
DIH-12-1 |
Galaxia Tower B |
R |
75 |
83 |
8 |
|
DIH-12-2 |
Galaxia Tower E |
R |
75 |
83 |
8 |
|
DIH-13-1 |
Canossa
Primary School |
E |
70 (65) |
82 |
12 (17) |
|
DIH-14-1 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 2 |
R |
75 |
90 |
15 |
|
DIH-14-3 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 8 |
R |
75 |
78[3] |
3 |
|
DIH-14-4 |
Canossa
Primary School (San Po Kong) |
E |
70 (65) |
84 |
14 (19) |
|
DIH-14-5 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 1 |
R |
75 |
90 |
15 |
|
DIH-15-1 |
Choi Hung Estate - Kam Wan
House |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
|
DIH-15-2 |
Choi Hung Estate - Kam Pik House |
R |
75 |
74 |
0 |
|
DIH-15-2A |
Choi
Hung Estate - Pik Hoi House |
R |
75 |
81 |
6 |
|
DIH-17-1 |
Chuk Yuen United
Village |
R |
75 |
81 |
6 |
|
Works Area – KAT |
||||||
KAT-P1-5-A |
Residential
premises near KAT |
R |
75 |
76[3] |
1 |
|
KAT-P1-5-B |
Residential
premises near KAT |
R |
75 |
90 |
15 |
|
KAT-P1-5-C |
Residential
premises near KAT |
R |
75 |
76 |
1 |
|
KAT-P1-5-D |
Residential
premises near KAT |
R |
75 |
81 |
6 |
|
KAT-P1-6 |
Residential
premises near KAT |
R |
75 |
78 |
3 |
|
Works Area – TKW |
||||||
MTW-6-1 |
Fok
On Building |
R |
75 |
83 |
8 |
|
MTW-6-2 |
Hong
Kong Society for the Protection of Children |
R |
75 |
81 |
5 |
|
TKW-1-1 |
Parc 22 |
R |
75 |
94 |
20 |
|
TKW-1-2 |
Sanford
Mansion |
R |
75 |
88 |
13 |
|
TKW-2-1 |
Skytower Tower 1 |
R |
75 |
87 |
12 |
|
TKW-2-2 |
Skytower Tower 2 |
R |
75 |
90 |
15 |
|
TKW-2-3 |
Skytower Tower 7 |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
|
TKW-3-1 |
Prince
Ritz |
R |
75 |
82 |
7 |
|
TKW-3-2 |
Prosperity
House |
R |
75 |
96 |
21 |
|
TKW-4-1 |
No.
26 Hok Ling Street |
R |
75 |
N/A[4] |
0 |
|
TKW-5-1 |
No. 37 – 39 Sa Po Road |
R |
75 |
69 |
0 |
|
Works Area – MTW |
||||||
MTW-8-1 |
Horae Place |
R |
75 |
90 |
15 |
|
MTW-12-2 |
Delight
Court |
R |
75 |
85 |
10 |
|
MTW-12-3 |
Lucky
Mansion |
R |
75 |
96 |
21 |
|
MTW-12-4 |
352-354 Ma Tau Wai Rd (East Façade) |
R |
75 |
96 |
21 |
|
MTW-12-4-1 |
352-354
Ma Tau Wai Rd (North
Façade) |
R |
75 |
99 |
24 |
|
MTW-12-5 |
Seng Cheong
Building |
R |
75 |
89 |
14 |
|
MTW-12-6 |
Great
Wall Building |
R |
75 |
90 |
15 |
|
MTW-12-9 |
Residential
premises along Hung Kwong Street |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
|
MTW-12-10 |
Lucky
Building (South Façade) |
R |
75 |
99 |
24 |
|
MTW-16-1 |
SKH
Good Shepherd Primary School |
E |
70 (65) |
94 |
24(29) |
|
MTW-17-1 |
Loyal
Mansion |
R |
75 |
90 |
15 |
|
MTW-18-1 |
Residential
premises along Chi Kiang Street |
R |
75 |
89 |
14 |
|
MTW-18-2 |
No.
2 Kowloon City Road |
R |
75 |
97 |
22 |
|
MTW-12-11 |
Jing
Ming Building |
R |
75 |
98 |
23 |
|
MTW-12-10-1 |
Lucky
Building (East Façade) |
R |
75 |
96 |
21 |
|
HOM-2-1 |
Faerie
Court (North Façade) |
R |
75 |
86 |
11 |
|
HOM-2-1A |
Faerie
Court (East Façade) |
R |
75 |
93 |
18 |
|
HOM -2-2 |
Lee
Wing Bldg |
R |
75 |
89 |
14 |
|
HOM -2-5 |
Chat
Ma Mansion |
R |
75 |
86 |
11 |
|
Works Area – Chatham Road North |
||||||
HOM-5-1 |
271
Chatham Road North |
R |
75 |
71 |
0 |
|
HUH-1-1 |
Cartas Branchi College of Careers |
E |
70 (65) |
73 |
3 (8) |
|
HUH-1-2 |
Lok Ka House |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
|
HUH-1-3 |
Wing
Fung Building |
R |
75 |
89 |
14 |
|
HUH-3-1 |
Royal
Peninsula Block 2 |
R |
75 |
68 |
0 |
|
HUH-4-1 |
The
Metropolis Residence Tower 2 |
S |
75 |
67 |
0 |
|
HUH-4-2 |
The
Metropolis Residence Tower 1 |
S |
75 |
67 |
0 |
|
HUH-8-1 |
No.
2, Gillies Avenue
South |
R |
75 |
70 |
0 |
|
HUH-10-1 |
Harbourfront Horizon |
C + S |
75 |
67 |
0 |
|
Notes:
[1] Values in parentheses indicate the
noise criterion during examination period of educational institution.
[2] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the noise criteria.
[3] Cumulative
impact from construction activities near Diamond Hill Stabling Sidings (Appendix 8.7D) and KAT (Appendix 8.8D) is included.
[4] No major construction site identified within
300m assessment area
Results show that,
without any mitigation measures, the predicted construction noise levels during
non-restricted hours would exceed the corresponding noise criteria at most of
the selected NSRs by 1 to 24dB(A) and 3 to 29dB(A) for
residential premises and educational institution respectively, especially for
those NSR very close to cut-&-cover tunnel, station adit
and station construction. Mitigation measures are therefore considered
necessary to reduce the adverse construction noise impact associated with the
project at all works area.
8.4.6
Mitigation Measures
The predicted
construction noise levels show that the unmitigated construction noise impacts
would exceed the daytime noise criteria.
Mitigation measures are therefore required. The following mitigation measures have been
considered:
·
Group
static PMEs at work site away from NSRs;
·
Good
site practices to limit noise emissions at the source;
·
Use
of quiet plant and working methods;
·
Use
of site hoarding as noise barrier to screen noise at ground level of NSRs;
·
Use
of shrouds / temporary noise barriers to screen noise from relatively static PMEs;
·
Use
of large full enclosure to screen all the plant;
·
Scheduling
of construction works outside school examination periods in critical area; and
·
Alternative
use of plant items within one worksite, wherever practicable.
The above mitigation
measures would need to be implemented in all work sites as good practices. It should be noted that whilst “Good
Practice” mitigation measures would help to alleviate the noise impacts, some
of these measures have not be included in the quantitative assessment as discussed
in the following sections. This would
ensure a more conservative assessment.
Detailed descriptions of
these mitigation measures are given in the following sections.
Group Static PME
Static noisy plant could be grouped
and located at work site far away from NSRs to reduce the noise level. For example, bar benders and cutters are
located at the stockpiling area of Hin Tin Playground
for the construction of HIK. Similarly, filtering plant and bar bender are
located at the stockpiling area of playground between Ma Tau Wai Road and To Kwa Wan Road, which is far away from the NSRs near Ma Tau
Wai Road. This would help to reduce the
noise impacts on some of the mostly adversely affected receiver.
Good Site
Practices and Noise Management Techniques
Good site practice and
noise management techniques could considerably reduce the noise impact from
construction site activities on nearby NSRs.
The following measures should be followed during each phase of
construction:
·
only
well-maintained plant should be operated on-site and plant should be serviced
regularly during the construction programme;
·
machines
and plant (such as trucks, cranes) that may be in intermittent use should be
shut down between work periods or should be throttled down to a minimum;
·
plant
known to emit noise strongly in one direction, where possible, be orientated so
that the noise is directed away from nearby NSRs;
·
silencers
or mufflers on construction equipment should be properly fitted and maintained
during the construction works;
·
mobile
plant should be sited as far away from NSRs as possible and practicable; and
·
material stockpiles, site office and other structures
should be effectively utilised, where practicable, to screen noise from on-site
construction activities.
The benefits of these
techniques can vary according to specific site conditions and operations. The environmental noise climate would
certainly be improved through these control practices, although the improvement
can only be quantified during implementation when specific site parameters are
known. The assessment has therefore not
taken into account the effectiveness of “Good Site Practices and Noise
Management Techniques”.
Use of Site
Hoarding
Purpose built temporary
noise barriers (approximately 2.5m high) located on the site boundaries between
noisy construction activities and NSRs could generally reduce noise levels at
low-level zone of NSRs through partial screening. In general, this would provide minimum 5 dB(A) attenuation for the low level receivers. It would be possible for the Contractor to
provide these in the form of site hoardings to achieve this attenuation effect,
provided that the barriers have no openings or gaps.
Good site practice shall also be adopted by the Contractor to ensure the
conditions of the hoardings are properly maintained throughout the construction
period. For conservative assessments,
however, the site hoarding has not been taken into consideration in the
construction noise assessments.
Use of Temporary Movable Noise Barrier & Enclosure
(with Sufficient Ventilation) for Relatively Static Plant
Movable temporary noise
barriers that can be located close to noisy plant and be moved concurrently
with the plant along a worksite can be very effective for screening noise from
NSRs. A typical design which has been
used locally is a wooden framed barrier with a small-cantilevered on a skid
footing with 25mm thick internal sound absorptive lining. This measure is
particularly effective for low level zone of NSRs. A cantilevered top cover would be required to
achieve screening benefits at upper floors of NSRs.
Movable barriers will be
used for some PME (e.g. pipe pile rigs, auger).
It is anticipated that suitably designed barriers could achieve at least
5 - 10dB(A) reduction.
For a conservative assessment, only a reduction of 5dB(A)
is assumed. Acoustic mat will be
used for other plant items such as trench cutter, piling, oscillator and
drilling rig and a 10 dB(A) noise reduction is
anticipated. This assumption has been
adopted in other approved EIA Reports.
The use of enclosure
(with sufficient ventilation) has been considered in this assessment to shelter
relatively static plant including air compressor, generator. The enclosures barriers can provide about 10dB(A) noise reduction.
For electric saw, movable noise barriers of 5dB(A)
attenuation have been assumed.
A summary of the
temporary movable barriers and enclosures adopted for various PMEs, and the
associated noise reduction is given in Appendix 8.3.
Large Full Enclosure for Construction Site
Another possible mitigation measures
is the use of large full enclosure for construction site during cut-&-cover
tunnel and station construction. A larger enclosure for the construction site
would provide better noise attenuation than the use of temporary noise barriers
/ acoustic mats. However, the height of the enclosure would need to be at least
9m in order to accommodate all the plant. Given the nature of construction
works, having such a tall barrier would impose adverse visual impacts to the
neighbouring receptors and pedestrians. Together with potential nuisance /
impacts on the access, the use of large enclosure for construction site would
cause significant impacts and hence is not recommended.
Use of “Quiet”
Plant and Working Methods
The use of quiet plant
is a feasible solution to tackle adverse noise impacts associated with
construction works. It is generally
known (supported by field measurement) that particular models of construction
equipment are quieter than standard types given in the TM-GW. Whilst it is generally considered too
restrictive to specify that the Contractor has to use specific models or items
of plant, it is reasonable and practicable to set plant noise performance
specifications for specific PME so that some flexibility in selection of plant
is allowed. A pragmatic approach would
be to request that the Contractor independently verifies the noise level of the
plant proposed to be used and demonstrates through furnishing of these results,
that the plant proposed to be used on the site meets the requirements.
The use of quiet plant
associated with the construction works is prescribed in British Standard “Noise
Control on Construction and Open Sites, BS5228: Part 1: 2009” which contains
the SWLs for specific quiet PME. It
should be noted that while various types of silenced equipment could be found
in Hong Kong, EPD when processing a CNP application for evening or night time
works may apply the noise levels specified in the TM-GW and TM-DA. CNP
applications which contain sufficient details of any particularly quiet items
of PME or any special noise control measures which the CNP applicant proposes
to employ on the site may be given special consideration by the Noise Control
Authority.
A summary of the “Quiet”
PMEs adopted and the associated SWLs is given in Appendix 8.3.
Sequencing
Operation of Construction Plant Equipment
In practice, some plant
items will operate sequentially within the same work site, and certain
reduction of the predicted noise impacts could be achieved. However, any additional control on the
sequencing of plant will impose a restrictive constraint to the Contractor on
the operation and planning of plant items, and the implementation of the
requirement would be difficult to be monitored.
Hence, sequencing operation of PME has not been taken into consideration
in the construction noise assessments.
8.4.7
Assessment Results - Mitigated Scenario
With the implementation
of the abovementioned mitigation measures, the construction noise levels at the
affected NSRs are predicted and presented in the following tables. The
predicted noise levels at most of the NSRs would comply with the corresponding
noise criteria, except some NSRs near the works area at DIH, TKW, MTW, and
Chatham Road North. Non-compliance at these NSRs is due to the shorter
separation distance, and the construction method at the worksites. Appendices
8.5E to 8.11E present the mitigated
noise contribution on a monthly basis during the construction period. Appendices
8.5F to 8.11F present the predicted
mitigated construction noise levels at selected representative NSRs.
Noise
impacts arisen from the Tsz Wan
Shan Pedestrian Link and Barging
Facility at Kai Tak Runway have also been included in this mitigated scenario
assessment. Appendices 8.12 presents
the details of the construction noise assessment for Tsz Wan Shan Pedestrian
Link and Appendices
8.14 present the
details of the construction noise assessment for Barging Facility at Kai Tak.
The noise impacts from the Freight Pier would be included in the cumulative
noise assessment. The construction programme of CKL will be concurrent
with SCL (TAW-HUH). However, the cumulative construction impacts are obstructed
by nearby building of the construction sites. Therefore, cumulative
construction noise impacts are not anticipated.
Table 8.13: Predicted Maximum Mitigated
Construction Noise Levels at Noise Sensitive Receivers
NSR ID |
NSR
Description |
Uses |
Criterion
[1] dB(A) |
Mitigated
Noise Level [2] dB(A) |
Exceedance
[3] dB(A) |
|
Works
Area – HIK |
||||||
TAW-5-1 |
Chan’s
Garden |
R |
75 |
66 |
0 |
|
TAW-5-2 |
L Louey |
R |
75 |
71 |
0 |
|
TAW-5-3 |
Joyville |
R |
75 |
70 |
0 |
|
TAW-6-4 |
Hin Keng Estate - Hin Yeung House |
R |
75 |
66 |
0 |
|
TAW-6-5 |
Hin Keng Estate - Hin Yau House |
R |
75 |
72 |
0 |
|
TAW-6-6 |
Hin Keng Estate - Hin Kwai House |
R |
75 |
75 |
0 |
|
TAW-6-7 |
C.U.H.K.A.A.
Thomas Cheung School |
E |
70 (65) |
68 |
0 (3) |
|
TAW-6-8 |
Hin Keng Estate – Hin Wan House |
R |
75 |
75 |
0 |
|
TAW-P1-2 |
Topside
Property above Tai Wai Depot (Façade
not facing Mei Tin Road) |
R |
75 |
58 |
0 |
|
TAW-6-2 |
Carmel
Alison Lam Primary Schhol |
E |
70 (65) |
60 |
0 (0) |
|
Works
Area – Ma Chai Hang Ventilation Building |
||||||
DIH-4-2 |
Carbo
Anglo-Chinese Kindergarten |
E |
70 (65) |
63 |
0 (0) |
|
DIH-20-1 |
Baptist
Rainbow Primary School |
E |
70 (65) |
64 |
0 (0) |
|
DIH-21-1 |
Tin Wang
Court - Wang King House |
R |
75 |
67 |
0 |
|
DIH-22-1 |
Price
Memorial Catholic Primary School |
E |
70 (65) |
65 |
0 (0) |
|
DIH-23-1 |
Tin Ma Court
- Chun On House |
R |
75 |
64 |
0 |
|
Works
Area – DIH |
||||||
DIH-3-4 |
Chuk Yuen South
Estate – Chui Yuen House |
R |
75 |
67 |
0 |
|
DIH-5-1 |
Rainbow Home |
R |
75 |
66 |
0 |
|
DIH-7-1 |
Tropicana
Gardens Block 2 |
R |
75 |
63 |
0 |
|
DIH-9-1 |
Shek On
Building |
E
+ W |
70 (65) |
70 |
0 (5) |
|
DIH-10-1 |
Hong Kong Sheung Keung Hui Nursing Home |
H |
75 |
70 |
0 |
|
DIH-11-1 |
Lung Poon
Court – Lung Wan House |
R |
75 |
73 |
0 |
|
DIH-12-1 |
Galaxia Tower B |
R |
75 |
70[4] |
0 |
|
DIH-12-2 |
Galaxia Tower E |
R |
75 |
74[4] |
0 |
|
DIH-13-1 |
Canossa
Primary School |
E |
70 (65) |
67 |
0 (2) |
|
DIH-14-1 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 2 |
R |
75 |
77 |
2 |
|
DIH-14-3 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 8 |
R |
75 |
64[5] |
0 |
|
DIH-14-4 |
Canossa
Primary School (San Po Kong) |
E |
70 (65) |
69 |
0 (4) |
|
DIH-14-5 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 1 |
R |
75 |
78 |
3 |
|
DIH-15-1 |
Choi Hung Estate - Kam Wan House |
R |
75 |
67 |
0 |
|
DIH-15-2 |
Choi Hung Estate - Kam Pik House |
R |
75 |
61 |
0 |
|
DIH-15-2A |
Choi Hung
Estate - Pik Hoi House |
R |
75 |
67 |
0 |
|
DIH-17-1 |
Chuk Yuen United
Village |
R |
75 |
66 |
0 |
|
Works
Area – KAT |
||||||
KAT-P1-5-A |
Residential premises
near KAT |
R |
75 |
61[5] |
0 |
|
KAT-P1-5-B |
Residential
premises near KAT |
R |
75 |
75 |
0 |
|
KAT-P1-5-C |
Residential
premises near KAT |
R |
75 |
62 |
0 |
|
KAT-P1-5-D |
Residential
premises near KAT |
R |
75 |
66 |
0 |
|
KAT-P1-6 |
Residential
premises near KAT |
R |
75 |
65 |
0 |
|
Works
Area – TKW |
||||||
MTW-6-1 |
Fok On
Building |
R |
75 |
69 |
0 |
|
MTW-6-2 |
Hong Kong
Society for the Protection of Children |
R |
75 |
67 |
0 |
|
TKW-1-1 |
Parc 22 |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
|
TKW-1-2 |
Sanford
Mansion |
R |
75 |
75 |
0 |
|
TKW-2-1 |
Skytower Tower 1 |
R |
75 |
73 |
0 |
|
TKW-2-2 |
Skytower Tower 2 |
R |
75 |
76 |
1 |
|
TKW-2-3 |
Skytower Tower 7 |
R |
75 |
66 |
0 |
|
TKW-3-1 |
Prince Ritz |
R |
75 |
67 |
0 |
|
TKW-3-2 |
Prosperity
House |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
|
TKW-4-1 |
No. 26 Hok Ling Street |
R |
75 |
N/A[6] |
0 |
|
TKW-5-1 |
No. 37 – 39 Sa Po Road |
R |
75 |
53 |
0 |
|
Works
Area – MTW |
||||||
MTW-8-1 |
Block 1, Horae Place |
R |
75 |
75 |
0 |
|
MTW-12-2 |
Delight
Court |
R |
75 |
71 |
0 |
|
MTW-12-3 |
Lucky
Mansion |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
|
MTW-12-4 |
352-354 Ma Tau Wai Rd (East Façade) |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
|
MTW-12-4-1 |
352-354 Ma
Tau Wai Rd (North Façade) |
R |
75 |
84 |
9 |
|
MTW-12-5 |
Seng Cheong
Building |
R |
75 |
74 |
0 |
|
MTW-12-6 |
Great Wall
Building |
R |
75 |
75 |
0 |
|
MTW-12-9 |
Residential
premises along Hung Kwong Street |
R |
75 |
65 |
0 |
|
MTW-12-10 |
Lucky
Building (South Façade) |
R |
75 |
84 |
9 |
|
MTW-16-1 |
SKH Good
Shepherd Primary School |
E |
70 (65) |
79 |
9 (14) |
|
MTW-17-1 |
Loyal
Mansion |
R |
75 |
75 |
0 |
|
MTW-18-1 |
Residential
premises along Chi Kiang Street |
R |
75 |
74 |
0 |
|
MTW-18-2 |
No. 2
Kowloon City Road |
R |
75 |
81 |
6 |
|
MTW-12-11 |
Jing Ming
Building |
R |
75 |
82 |
7 |
|
MTW-12-10-1 |
Lucky
Building (East Façade) |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
|
HOM-2-1 |
Faerie
Court (North Façade) |
R |
75 |
71 |
0 |
|
HOM-2-1A |
Faerie Court
(South Façade) |
R |
75 |
78 |
3 |
|
HOM-2-2 |
Lee Wing
Bldg |
R |
75 |
74 |
0 |
|
HOM-2-5 |
Chat Ma Mansion |
R |
75 |
71 |
0 |
|
Works
Area – Chatham Road North |
||||||
HOM-5-1 |
271 Chatham
Road North |
R |
75 |
60 |
0 |
|
HUH-1-1 |
Caritas Branchi College of Careers |
E |
70 (65) |
62 |
0 (0) |
|
HUH-1-2 |
Lok Ka House |
R |
75 |
68 |
0 |
|
HUH-1-3 |
Wing Fung
Building |
R |
75 |
77 |
2 |
|
HUH-3-1 |
Royal
Peninsula Block 2 |
R |
75 |
57 |
0 |
|
HUH-4-1 |
The
Metropolis Residence Tower 2 |
S |
75 |
55 |
0 |
|
HUH-4-2 |
The
Metropolis Residence Tower 1 |
S |
75 |
54 |
0 |
|
HUH-8-1 |
No. 2, Gillies Avenue South |
R |
75 |
58 |
0 |
|
HUH-10-1 |
Harbourfront Horizon |
C
+ S |
75 |
54 |
0 |
|
Barging
Facility – Kai Tak |
||||||
KAT-P1-6 |
Residential
premises near KAT |
R |
75 |
46 |
0 |
|
Notes:
[1] Values
in parentheses
indicate the noise criterion during examination period of educational
institution.
[2] Bolded values mean exceedance of the
noise criteria.
[3] Values
in parentheses
indicate the exceedances during examination period of
educational institution.
[4] Cumulative impact arisen
from Tsz Wan Shan Pedestrian Link is included.
[5] Cumulative impact from
construction activities near Diamond Hill Stabling Sidings (Appendix 8.7D) and KAT (Appendix 8.8D) is included.
[6] No major construction site identified
within 300m assessment area
8.4.1
Assessment
Results – Cumulative Construction Noise for HUH and HOM
Cumulative construction noise assessment for HUH and HOM has been conducted by extracting relevant information and assessment associated with HUH and HOM from respective EIA reports. Appendix 8.15 presents the mitigated construction noise impacts from HUH and HOM at selected representative NSRs. For the construction noise impacts from HOM, the predicted results from approved EIA-184/2010 “Kwun Tong Line Extension”[8-7] have been adopted.
Table 8.13a: Predicted Construction Noise Levels from SCL (TAW-HUH), HUH and HOM
NSR ID |
NSR Description |
Uses |
Criterion [1] dB(A) |
Mitigated
Noise Level [2] dB(A) |
Exceedance [3] dB(A) |
HOM-5-1 |
271 Chatham
Road North |
R |
75 |
60 |
0 |
HUH-1-1 |
Caritas Branchi College of Careers |
E |
70
(65) |
72 |
2 (7) |
HUH-1-2 |
Lok Ka House |
R |
75 |
70 |
0 |
HUH-1-3 |
Wing Fung
Building |
R |
75 |
78 |
3 |
HUH-3-1 |
Royal
Peninsula Block 2 |
R |
75 |
73 |
0 |
HUH-4-1 |
The
Metropolis Residence Tower 2 |
S |
75 |
73 |
0 |
HUH-4-2 |
The
Metropolis Residence Tower 1 |
S |
75 |
54 |
0 |
HUH-8-1 |
No. 2, Gillies Avenue South |
R |
75 |
58 |
0 |
Notes:
[1] Values
in parentheses
indicate the noise criterion during examination period of educational
institution.
[2] Bolded values mean exceedance of the
noise criteria.
It can be seen
from the above table that the additional impacts from the construction of HUH
and HOM would not change the compliance of the criterion at the NSRs.
8.4.2
Assessment
Results – Cumulative Construction Noise with Concurrent Projects
Amongst the NSRs considered, some of them would experience cumulative construction noise impacts from other concurrent projects (see Section 8.3). Liaisons have therefore been made with their respective project proponents and reference has also been made to the respective EIA Reports to obtain their construction noise prediction. The construction activities related from the construction of KTE and SCL (MKK-HUH) and SCL (HUH-ADM) have been included in the assessment. The following table summarises the results for the selected NSRs.
Table 8.14:
Predicted Cumulative
Construction Noise Levels at Noise Sensitive Receivers
NSR ID |
NSR Description |
Construction Noise Contribution [2] dB(A) |
Criteria
dB(A) |
Total
[2] dB(A) |
Exceedance [1] dB(A) |
|||
[4] |
KTE |
[5] |
CKR |
|||||
HUH-1-1 |
Cartas Branchi College of
Careers |
62 |
72[3] |
- |
- |
70 (65) |
72 |
2(7) |
HUH-1-2 |
Lok Ka House |
68 |
73[3] |
- |
- |
75 |
73 |
0 |
HUH-1-3 |
Wing Fung
Building |
77 |
67[3] |
67 |
- |
75 |
78 |
3 |
HUH-3-1 |
Royal
Peninsula Block 2 |
57 |
- |
73 |
- |
75 |
73 |
0 |
HUH-4-1 |
The
Metropolis Residence Tower 2 |
55 |
- |
73 |
- |
75 |
73 |
0 |
HUH-10-1 |
Harbourfront Horizon |
54 |
- |
73 |
- |
75 |
73 |
0 |
Notes:
[1] Values
in parentheses indicate the exceedance during examination period of educational
institution.
[2] Bolded values mean
exceedance of the noise criteria.
[3] Cumulative impacts arisen from EPIW is included.
[4] SCL (TAW-HUH)
[5] SCL (MKK-HUH) & SCL (HUH-ADM)
For Caritas Branchi College
of Careers (HUH-1-1), recent site visit indicated that the college has been
moved to Tseung Kwan O since Sept 2009. The ownership
of HUH-1-1 has transferred back to the owner. The building is now non-occupied
and is therefore not considered as a sensitive receiver. The results provided
in Table 8.14 are for
reference only. The contractor should further confirm the use before
commencement of the construction.
Housing Authority Development Sites 1A & 1B
As discussed in Section 1, the construction of the Housing Authority Development Sites 1A and 1B (i.e. KAT-P1-5-A, KAT-P1-5-B, KAT-P1-5-C, KAT-P1-5-D and KAT-P1-6) would be concurrent with the construction of the KAT and the associated cut-&-cover tunnel sections for about 1 year since the intake year for Sites 1A and 1B would be occurred in October 2012.
However, the site formation of the Sites 1A and 1B have been completed,
the noise impacts caused by these superstructure works on the nearest receivers
at Rhythm Garden and Choi Hung Estate (ie DIH-14-3 and DIH-15-2) at more than
270m and 330m respectively away
would not be significant as compared to the construction noise generated by the
construction of KAT and the associated cut-&-cover tunnel. Besides, it is anticipated that the project
proponent of the Sites 1A and1B would implement effective good site practices
such as quiet plant and temporary movable noise barriers for some of the mobile
PME. Therefore, the cumulative construction noise impacts due to the
construction of Sites 1A and 1B would not be significant.
Other Infrastructure Development within Kai Tak
Development
As discussed in Section 1, the construction of some of the other infrastructure development within Kai Tak Development would be concurrent with the construction of the KAT and the associated cut-&-cover tunnel sections. However, the site formation of these infrastructure have been completed, the noise impacts caused by these superstructure works on the nearest receivers at Rhythm Garden, Choi Hung Estate and residential premises near KAT (ie DIH-14-3, DIH15-2, KAT-P1-5-A, KAT-P1-5-B, KAT-P1-5-C, KAT-P1-5-D and KAT-P1-6) at more than 990m, 1100m, 920m, 730m, 620m, 840m and 490m respectively away would not be significant as compared to the construction noise generated by the construction of KAT and the associated cut-&-cover tunnel. Besides, it is anticipated that the project proponent of the other infrastructure developments would implement effective good site practices such as quiet plant and temporary movable noise barriers for some of the mobile PME. Therefore, the cumulative construction noise impacts due to the construction of other infrastructure development within Kai Tak Development would not be significant.
8.4.3
Residual Impacts
As discussed above, even with all practicable construction noise mitigation measures adopted, such as the use of quiet PME, temporary movable noise barrier and enclosure, residual impacts exceeding the construction noise criterion are still expected at some NSRs, as summarised in the table below:
Table 8.15: Residual Impacts at Noise Sensitive Receivers
NSR ID |
NSR Description |
Uses |
Criterion
[1] dB(A) |
Maximum
Noise Level dB(A) |
Residual
Noise Impact dB(A) |
Duration
for Maximum Noise Level (Month) [5] |
TAW-6-7 |
C.U.H.K.A.A.
Thomas Cheung School |
E |
70 (65) |
68(67) |
0 (2) [2] |
0 (1) |
DIH-9-1 |
Shek On
Building |
E
+ W |
70 (65) |
70 (70) |
0(5) [2] |
0 (2) |
DIH-13-1 |
Canossa
Primary School |
E |
70 (65) |
67(66) |
0(1) [2] |
0 (2) |
DIH-14-1 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 2 |
R |
75 |
77 |
2 |
5 |
DIH-14-4 |
Canossa
Primary School (San Po Kong) |
E |
70 (65) |
69 (68) |
0 (3) [2] |
0 (3) |
DIH-14-5 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 1 |
R |
75 |
78 |
3 |
1 |
TKW-1-1 |
Parc 22 |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
5 |
TKW-2-2 |
Skytower Tower 2 |
R |
75 |
76 |
1 |
5 |
TKW-3-2 |
Prosperity
House |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
4 |
MTW-12-3 |
Lucky
Mansion |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
2 |
MTW-12-4 |
352-354 Ma Tau Wai Rd (East Façade) |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
3 |
MTW-12-4-1 |
352-354 Ma
Tau Wai Rd (North Façade) |
R |
75 |
84 |
9 |
1 |
MTW-12-10 |
Lucky
Building (South Façade) |
R |
75 |
84 |
9 |
1 |
MTW-12-10-1 |
Lucky Building
(East Façade) |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
1 |
MTW-12-11 |
Jing Ming
Building |
R |
75 |
82 |
7 |
1 |
MTW-16-1 |
SKH Good
Shepherd Primary School |
E |
70 (65) |
79 (79) |
9(14) [2] |
2(1) |
MTW-18-2 |
No. 2
Kowloon City Road |
R |
75 |
81 |
6 |
2 |
HOM-2-1-A |
Faerie Court
(East Façade) |
R |
75 |
78 |
3 |
12 |
HUH-1-3 |
Wing Fung
Building |
R |
75 |
77 |
2 |
1 |
Notes:
[1] Values
in parentheses
indicate the noise criterion during examination period (typical
examination period in May, June, November and December) of educational
institution.
[2] Residual impact is only expected during
the examination period (typical examination period in May, June,
November and December) of the educational institution.
[3] In general practice, examination period
should only last for 2 weeks. By scheduling the construction works to avoid the
examination period, the residual impact should be minimised.
[4] Values in parentheses indicate the
duration of residual impact in consideration of the noise criterion during
examination period.
[5] Please refer to Tables 8.16.1 to 8.16.3
for the total impact duration for noise exceedance.
The above table indicates that the maximum residual impacts and the associated duration despite of the implementation of all practicable noise mitigation measures. In order to indicate the distribution of noise exceedance and the duration of the noise exceedence, the noise exceedence has been also categorised into different types of receivers and groups of duration, as summarised in Table 8.16.1a, 8.16.2a and 8.13.
Table 8.16.1a Residual Noise
Impacts (Residential Premises)
NSR-ID |
NSR Description |
Impact
Duration (Month) for Noise Exceedance |
|||||||
1
– 4dB(A) |
5dB(A) |
6dB(A) |
7dB(A) |
8dB(A) |
9dB(A) |
10
dB(A) |
>=11
dB(A) |
||
DIH-14-1 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 2 |
5 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
DIH-14-5 |
Rhythm
Garden Block 1 |
3 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
TKW-1-1 |
Parc 22 |
6 |
5 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
TKW-2-2 |
Skytower Tower 2 |
5 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
TKW-3-2 |
Prosperity
House |
- |
4 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
MTW-12-3 |
Lucky Mansion
|
15 |
2 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
MTW-12-4 |
352-354 Ma Tau Wai Rd (East Façade) |
14 |
3 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
MTW-12-4-1 |
352-354 Ma
Tau Wai Rd (North Façade) |
3 |
- |
- |
7 |
- |
1 |
- |
- |
MTW-12-10 |
Lucky
Building (South Façade) |
- |
- |
5 |
2 |
- |
1 |
- |
- |
MTW-12-10-1 |
Lucky
Building (East Façade) |
10 |
1 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
MTW-12-11 |
Jing Ming
Building |
3 |
7 |
2 |
1 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
MTW-18-2 |
No. 2
Kowloon City Road |
2 |
- |
2 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
HOM-2-1-A |
Faerie Court
(East Façade) |
12 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
HUH-1-3 |
Wing Fung
Building |
2 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
It
can be seen from the Table 8.16.1a for residential
premises, the residual impacts exceeding the construction noise criterion are
in the range of 1-9dB(A) and the duration of
exceedance ranges from 2 – 17
months.
For some residential premises such as Parc 22, Prosperity House, 352-354 Ma Tau Wai Rd (East Façade and North Façade), Lucky Building (East Façade and South Façade), No. 2 Kowloon City Road and Jing Ming Building (TKW-1-1, TKW-3-2, MTW-12-4-1, MTW-12-4, MTW-12-10, MTW-12-10-1, MTW-18-2 and MTW-12-11), the residual impacts would be higher (> 79dB(A)), in the range of 5 – 9dB(A), with the duration of exceedance typically 1 – 10 months. This is attributable to the relatively short separation distance between the NSRs and the work sites. For example, the construction activities of adit work for 352-354 Ma Tau Wai Rd (North Façade) (MTW-12-4-1) and Lucky Building (South Façade) (MTW-12-10) are both located at 8m from the work sites respectively.
The magnitude of the residual impacts is assessed in accordance with Section 4.4.3 of the TM-EIAO in Table 8.16.1b.
Table 8.16.1b Assessment
of Residual Impacts
Criteria |
Assessment |
Effects on public health and health
of biota or risk of life. |
The extent of noise nuisance would be
unlikely to induce public health concern. |
Magnitude of the adverse
environmental impacts. |
Residual impacts exceeding the
construction noise criterion of between 1-9dB(A)
could occur at up to 12 NSRs during the construction phase upon worse case
scenarios. |
Geographic extent of the adverse
environmental impacts. |
The geographic extent of the adverse
impacts from noise is anticipated to be limited to within about 50m from the
SCL (TAW-HUH) project works area. |
Duration and frequency of the adverse
environmental impacts. |
The
construction noise impacts of SCL (TAW-HUH) will be from 2 to 17 months and
are, therefore, temporary and reversible. |
Likely size of the community or the
environmental that may be affected by the adverse impacts. |
About 750
flats would be affected. In addition, pedestrians within immediate vicinity
will be temporarily affected. |
Degree to which the adverse
environmental impacts are reversible or irreversible. |
Construction
phase impacts should be reversible. |
Ecological context. |
Not
Applicable |
Degree of disruption to sites of
cultural heritage. |
Very minimal
as there would be no import cultural heritage resources in the immediate
vicinity of work sites. |
International and regional
importance. |
The impacts
are localized and not of international and regional importance. |
Likelihood and degree of uncertainty
of adverse environmental impacts |
The impacts predicted are based upon
worst case assumptions and as such, would not occur to the extent predicted
on all occasions. However, the assessment has been made using approved modelling techniques and the degree of certainty on the
results is high. |
The residual impacts
exceeding the construction noise criterion on school during examination and non-examination
periods are presented in Table 8.16.2a and Table 8.16.3. Typically
examination period will be in May, June, November and December. For assessment purpose, it is assumed that
examination periods would be in May, June, November and December and they are
considered to exceed the noise criterion for school examination periods.
Table 8.16.2a shows the residual impacts exceeding the construction noise criterion on school during their normal period. Most of the schools during their normal period (i.e. non-examination period) would be subject to construction noise impacts complying with the criterion, except the SKH Good Shepherd Primary School (MTW-16-1). SKH Good Shepherd Primary School (MTW-16-1) is at around 21m from the cut-&-cover station of guide wall, diaphragm wall and king post construction. The predicted residual impacts on MTW-16-1 would be up to 9dB(A) for 2 months and the total number of months with noise impacts exceeding the noise criterion is 46 months.
Table 8.16.2a Residual
Noise Impacts (Educational Institution During Normal
Period)
NSR-ID |
NSR Description |
Impact
Duration (Month) for Noise Exceedance |
|||||||
1
– 4dB(A) |
5dB(A) |
6dB(A) |
7dB(A) |
8dB(A) |
9dB(A) |
10dB(A) |
11dB(A) |
||
MTW-16-1 |
SKH Good Shepherd Primary School |
12 |
6 |
16 |
6 |
4 |
2 |
- |
- |
Further analysis has also been conducted to evaluate the potential noise impacts by adopting the noise criterion for examination period (Table 8.16.3 refers). It can be seen that a number of the schools along the alignment would be affected by construction noise during their examination periods. Typically examination period will be in May, June, November and December. For assessment purpose, it is assumed that examination periods would be in May, June, November and December and they are considered to exceed the noise criterion for school examination periods. The duration for construction noise impacts during the school examination periods is shown in Table 8.16.3.
Table
8.16.3: Residual Noise Impacts (Educational
Institution During Examination Period)
[1]
NSR-ID |
NSR
Description |
Impact Duration (Month) for Noise
Exceedance |
|||
|
1 – 4dB(A) |
5 – 9dB(A) |
10 – 14dB(A) |
>= 15dB(A) |
|
TAW-6-7 |
C.U.H.K.A.A. Thomas Cheung School |
1 |
- |
- |
- |
DIH-9-1 |
Shek On Building |
6 |
2 |
- |
- |
DIH-13-1 |
Canossa Primary School |
2 |
- |
- |
- |
DIH-14-4 |
Canossa Primary School (San Po Kong) |
5 |
- |
- |
- |
MTW-16-1 |
SKH Good Shepherd Primary School |
- |
3 |
13 |
- |
Note:
[1] Typical
examination period in May, June, November and December.
8.4.4
Consideration of
Further Mitigation Measures
It can be seen from Section 8.4.10 that some of the noise sensitive receivers would be subject to residual impacts exceeding the construction noise criterion. The feasibility of refining the construction methodologies and further noise mitigation measures have therefore been further considered as discussed in the following sections.
Works Area – HIK
There would be no exceedance over the noise criterion for the residual impacts on Hin Keng Estate, however, the CUHKAA Thomas Cheung School (TAW-6-7) would be exposed to residual impact of up to 2dB(A) during examination period. The noise impacts during normal school period would comply with the respective noise criterion. As such, it is recommended that the noisy construction works should be scheduled as far as practicable to avoid examination period. The Project Proponent would keep close liaison with the affected schools on their examination schedules.
Works Area –
Ma Chai Hang Ventilation Building
There
would be no exceedance over the noise criterion on both residential and
educational institution noise sensitive receivers, which is near to Ma Chai Hang Ventilation Building. The noise impacts during
examination period would still comply with the respective noise criterion.
Works Area – DIH
Rhythm Garden (DIH-14-1 and DIH-14-5) would be subject to a residual impacts of 1-3dB(A)and for a duration of 5 months. The noise impacts would be caused by mobilization for commencing the cut-&-cover tunnel directly in front of the receivers. In addition, although the use of large full enclosure for the construction site would alleviate the residual impact it would also cause significant visual impact to its neighbourhood. It is therefore not recommended.
For DIH stabling entry tunnels and mainline tunnels from north of Kai Tak Development area to Kai Tak, due to shallow soil cover to the tunnel crown of DIH stabling entry tunnels and the acute tunnel connection between DIH stabling entry tunnels and mainline tunnels, cut-&-cover construction method has been adopted. It is therefore concluded that all the practicable noise mitigation measures have been implemented.
For Shek On Building (DIH-9-1) which is a school, there would be no exceedance over the noise criterion during normal school period, and there would be a residual impacts of 1 - 5dB(A) during examination period. The noise impacts are attributable to the bored piles pipe pile wall and excavation construction concurrent occurred in the DIH. It is therefore concluded that all the practicable noise mitigation measures have been implemented. To further minimise the impact, it is recommended that the noisy construction works should be scheduled as far as practicable to avoid examination period. The Project Proponent would keep close liaison with the affected schools on their examination schedules.
For Canossa Primary School (DIH-13-1), the predicted construction noise impacts would comply with the criterion for normal school period. It would however have a residual impacts of 1 dB(A) during the examination period for 2 months. To further minimise the impact, it is recommended that the noisy construction works should be scheduled as far as practicable to avoid examination period. The Project Proponent would keep close liaison with the affected schools on their examination schedules.
For the Canossa Primary School (San Po Kong) (DIH-14-4), the predicted construction noise impacts would comply with the criterion for normal school period. It would however have a residual impacts of 1 - 3dB(A) during the examination period for five months. To further minimise the impact, it is recommended that the noisy construction works should be scheduled as far as practicable to avoid examination period. The Project Proponent would keep close liaison with the affected schools on their examination schedules.
Works Area – TKW
Residual impacts in the range of 1 – 5dB(A) are predicted at the various residential premises (TKW-1-1. TKW-2-2, and TKW-3-2) alongside of construction areas for adits. These residential premises are located at 14 – 30m from the adit construction areas.
As explained in Section 8.3.6, the use of full noise enclosure for the site has also been considered. However, for the NSRs located alongside of the Pak Tai Street and Nam Kok Road where the adit has to be located, erecting a full enclosure with sufficient headroom for the construction plant to manoeuvre inside would demand a very tall full noise enclosure of height taller than 9m. Such a full noise enclosure would block the ventilation and sunlight to the pedestrians and even to the lower level residential units. This would also cause concerns on safety and health. These secondary impacts are considered adverse and hence the use of full noise enclosures is not further considered.
As such, all direct mitigation measures are considered exhausted and the construction noise impact has been minimized as far as possible.
Works Area –
MTW
The predicted residual impacts on the neighbouring sensitive receivers are 1-9dB(A) for the residential premises and up to 9dB(A) for SKH Good Shepherd Primary School (MTW-16-1). These sensitive receivers are located along MTW where cut-&-cover construction methodology is required.
Temporary decks have been considered and where practicable, would be provided to alleviate the impact of noise associated with the operation of construction plant underneath during the cut-&-cover station / tunnel construction. A sketch showing the indicative extent of the temporary deck is illustrated in Appendix 8.16. This approach has optimised the opportunity to reduce the number of above ground construction plant required during the excavation and backfilling processes. All the above ground stationary construction plant items have also been considered for implementing temporary noise enclosures etc whenever possible. Quiet construction plant has also been considered.
As explained in Section 8.3.6, the use of full noise enclosure for the site has also been considered. However, for the NSRs located alongside of the Ma Tau Wai Road where the station has to be located, erecting a full enclosure with sufficient headroom for the construction plant to manoeuvre inside would demand a very tall full noise enclosure of height taller than 9m. Such a full noise enclosure would block the ventilation and sunlight to the pedestrians and even to the lower level residential units. This would also cause concerns on safety and health. These secondary impacts are considered adverse and hence the use of full noise enclosures is not further considered.
Entrance A of MTW Station and the ventilation shafts are located adjacent to the SKH Good Shepherd Primary School (MTW-16-1). The construction methodology includes concrete slab breaking and removal, utility diversion and protection, diaphragm walling, pipe pile installation, excavation and concreting. During the course of developing the plant inventory for the road opening works required, major considerations have been made to the presence of numerous utilities located in the footpaths and carriageways along Ma Tau Wai Road which will need extreme careful excavation and protection. In particular, it must be noted that Ma Tau Wai Road is an old urban area where accurate utilities records are not available. Also, the as-built drawings of the road pavements are not available thus the actual site conditions will need to be verified on site.
For works to be carried out within the footpaths, the use of any machine mounted plant will not be possible due to the high risk of damage to the utilities which have shallow covers. It is considered that there is no alternative to the use of hand operated pneumatic breakers for the opening of the footpaths.
For works to be carried out within the carriageways, alternative methods to conventional hydraulic breakers for breaking the road slab have been considered, e.g. saw cutting the slab and lifting out in small sections, by mechanical ripping or hydraulic crushing. However, due to the unknown depth of the concrete construction of the road, saw cutting can be discounted as the size of saw cannot be determined. Application of such methods will impose high risk to the existing roads and also the utilities underneath. To summarise, use of conventional plants is considered to be the most appropriate construction method for road opening works in Ma Tau Wai Road.
As such, all direct mitigation measures are considered exhausted and the construction noise impact has been minimized as far as possible. The Project Proponent would keep close liaison with the affected schools on their examination schedules.
Works Area – Chatham Road North
The predicted residual impacts on the neighbouring residential buildings such as Wing Fung Building (HUH-1-3) are 1-2dB(A). The total period with noise exceedance is 2 months.
Quiet PMEs, temporary movable noise barrier, and temporary movable noise enclosure have already been proposed to alleviate the noise impact from the construction works near Chatham Road North. However, Wing Fung Building (HUH-1-3) would still be affected by the construction noise impact arisen from the project. The main reason for the adverse residual impact would be its very limited separation distance of 25m from the construction site. In view of this constraint, the predicted residual impact is considered minimised and no further practical direct mitigation measures were available.
Indirect
Technical Remedies (ITR)
Residual impacts have been minimised via exhausting all practical direct noise mitigation measures, including the use of quiet PME, temporary movable noise barriers, and noise enclosure for various construction plant. Review of the further mitigation measures have been conducted in consideration of the constraints and works nature. It is considered that all practicable mitigation measures have been exhausted and residual impacts have been minimised.
Due to the closed proximity to the affect NSRs, residual impact could not be abated by further direct mitigation measures. The Project Proponent will facilitate communications with concerned parties on the residual impacts during construction and review to consider other initiatives, such as ITR, if required. However, it should be noted that the use of ITR as a mitigation measure is neither a requirement regulated under Annex 13 of the TM-EIAO nor the EIA Study Brief. However, the provision of ITR may be considered as the last resort to reduce the noise nuisance arisen from the construction of SCL (TAW-HUH). ITR would generally require the consideration to upgrade the window glazing if necessary for the façades exposed to excessive noise. Provision of air-conditioning would also be considered for those affected dwellings.
8.5.1
Operational
Airborne Noise Source
Most of the alignment would be in tunnel and hence would not have adverse airborne noise impact. However, there are 2 sections of at-grade or elevated tracks, one in Tai Wai and one in Hung Hom which are exposed and would generate airborne noise. In addition, the ventilation building at Ma Chai Hang, ventilation system for stations and stabling sidings would be a fixed industrial noise that needs to be considered.
It should be noted that any preparation works for engineering trains will only be carried out inside the Tai Wai Depot which is underneath the deck. The uses and operational pattern of the tail track would not change after the commissioning of the SCL (TAW-HUH).
8.5.2
Noise Sensitive
Receivers
While alignment within the
project boundary is assessed, NSRs within 300m of the boundary are
included. Planned NSRs of the top-side
property developments in Tai Wai would be included in this assessment. Their Area Sensitive Ratings and the
night-time assessment goal, which is the most critical period for operational
train noise assessment, are summarised in Table 8.17.
The locations of all NSRs are given in Figures 8.1.1 to 8.1.14.
Table 8.17: Summary
of Noise Sensitive Receivers and Area Sensitivity Ratings
NSR ID |
NSR Description |
Type [3] |
ASR |
Assessment Goal[2] |
TAW-1-1 |
Block 6, Carado Garden |
R |
B |
45[1] |
TAW-2-1 |
Shatin
Heights |
R |
B |
45[1] |
TAW-3-1 |
K K Terrace |
R |
C |
50[1] |
TAW-4-1 |
Block
2&3, Woodcrest Hill |
R |
C |
50[1] |
TAW-5-1 |
Chan’s
Garden, The Blossom |
R |
B |
45[1] |
TAW-5-2 |
L Louey, The Blossom |
R |
B |
45[1] |
TAW-5-3 |
Joyville |
R |
B |
45[1] |
TAW-6-1 |
Hin Yiu House, Hin Keng Estate |
R |
B |
45[1] |
TAW-6-2 |
Carmel
Alison Lam Primary School, Hin Keng
Estate |
E |
B |
55[1] |
TAW-6-3 |
Hin Tak House, Hin Keng Estate |
R |
B |
45[1] |
TAW-6-4 |
Hin Yeung House, Hin Keng Estate |
R |
B |
45[1] |
TAW-7-1 |
Kam Cheong Building |
R |
B |
45[1] |
TAW-8-1 |
Block 2, Grandway Garden |
R |
B |
45[1] |
TAW-9-1 |
Christian
Alliance Cheng Wing Gee College |
E |
B |
55[1] |
TAW-10-1 |
Holford Garden |
R |
B |
45[1] |
TAW-P1-1 |
Festival
City (Façade facing
Mei Tin Road) |
R |
B |
45[1] |
TAW-P1-2 |
Festival
City (Façade not
facing Mei Tin Road) |
R |
B |
45[1] |
TAW-P2-1 |
Property
above Tai Wai Station (Façade facing
Mei Tin Road) |
R |
B |
45[1] |
HUH-1-3 |
Wing Fung
Mansion |
R |
C |
50[1] |
HUH-3-1 |
Block 2,
Royal Peninsula |
R |
C |
50[1] |
HUH-4-1 |
Tower 2, The
Metropolis Residence[4] |
S |
B |
45[1] |
HUH-4-2 |
Tower 1, The
Metropolis Residence[4] |
S |
B |
45[1] |
HUH-8-1 |
2 Gillies Avenue South |
R |
C |
50[1] |
HUH-10-1 |
Harbourfront Horizon[5] |
C
+ S |
B |
55 |
Notes:
[1] A 10dB(A) is
assumed as the noise contribution from existing East Rail Line and Intercity
Train. To take into account the
cumulative airborne noise impacts from the existing East Rail Line and Intercity
Train, an assessment goal of ANL – 10 dB(A) is adopted.
[2] Daytime criterion is adopted for
educational institutes. It is assumed
that there would be no night-time activities (2300 – 0700 hours) for education
institutes.
[3] R–
residential; E – educational; H – clinic/ home for the aged; W – worship; GIC –
government, institution and community; P – performing arts centres;
S – Service Apartment; C – Commercial
[4] Metropolis
Residence is a service apartment and shall not rely on openable
windows for ventilation. Nonetheless, for conservative consideration that
occupier might open window under special circumstances, this premise has been
considered as an assessment point.
[5] Harbourfront Horizon shall not rely on openable
windows for ventilation. Nonetheless, for conservative consideration that
occupier might open window under special circumstances, this premise has been
considered as an assessment point.
8.5.3
Assessment
Methodology – Operational Noise
8.5.3.1 Railway Noise
The
assessment covers rail alignment within the project boundary. As discussed in Section 8.4.1, most of the tracks for SCL (TAW-HUH) will be in
tunnels and adverse operational airborne train noise impacts are not
anticipated. However, a short section
between HIK and Tai Wai depot would be on embankment and viaduct and another
section near HUH would be at-grade, thereby inevitably generating airborne
railway noise impacts. The proposed methodology for predicting the airborne
train noise impacts is given below.
Arup’s train noise model (OveRail) will be used to predict and assess the propagation of airborne train noise. The modelling methodology for propagation is based on the prediction procedures in Calculation of Railway Noise 1995 (CRN)[8-8] and it has been validated against the examples listed in CRN handbooks.
Whilst the propagation model would be based on CRN, the train noise (both rolling noise and A/C noise) source term would base upon the noise level measured during the commissioning of SP1900 train[8-9] and is based on a disc braked Electric Multiple Unit (EMU). The source term measurement report is given in Appendix 8.17. A description of the noise source term is given below.
Parameters |
On Ballast Track |
Lmax |
75.3 dB(A) |
Rail |
Continuously weld rail |
Trackform |
Ballasted track |
Speed |
130kph |
Distance |
25m |
The
calculation of SEL (single train event) from Lmax
is based on the following equation |
|
SEL = Lmax
+ 10 log (L/V) +10.5 –10 log (4D / (4D2+1) + 2 tan-1 (1/2D)) Where
L = train length, m (200m for SCL
(TAW-HUH) train, the same as MOL 8-car configuration) V = train speed, kph
d = Distance from track, m (reference distance at 25m) D = d / L |
|
SEL for 8 car |
82.7 dB(A) |
For
non-revenue trains (eg engineering trains) of SCL (TAW-HUH),
noise will also be generated by rolling stock operating during the non-revenue
hours of the railway typically between 0200 and 0500. These will be used to
support maintenance operations in the transporting of personnel and plant for
inspection and remedial works. As discussed in Section 8.4.1, there would not be any preparation of engineering
trains on the existing tail track to the south of the Tai Wai Depot.
During the maintenance of the tracks, as overhead line power supply may need to
be turned off for safety and other requirements, the rolling stock will be
independently powered locomotives. These will typically trail a short rake of
wagons or self-propelled ballast tamping machines and rail grinding apparatus.
Noise
from non-revenue trains would be governed by Construction Noise Permit and
hence would not be quantified in this EIA.
The
tracks would be modelled as segments such that the
variation of noise contribution within the track segment is less than 2 dB(A), which is in line with CRN. For each segment, corrections would be
applied to compute its noise contribution to NSRs. The total noise levels at receivers would
then be computed by combining the noise contributions from all the segments.
As
the nighttime noise criteria is 10dB(A) more stringent
than the daytime, compliance with the nighttime criteria would typically mean
compliance with the daytime criteria at the NSRs. During the daytime period, 24
trains/direction/hour is assumed for this noise assessment. In addition, a sensitivity test has been
conducted to examine the noise effect if the train frequency is increased in
the future operation. As compared with the
predicted daytime noise levels based on the assumption of 24 trains/direction/hour,
an increase of 0.3dB(A) and 0.7dB(A) would be
predicted respectively for 26 and 28 trains/direction/hour.
A
summary of other correction factors to be included in the airborne train noise
prediction model is given below.
Table 8.18: Summary of Correction Factors
Parameters |
Assumptions |
Remarks |
Rail
deterioration |
+3dB(A) |
The
source term measurement was taken with typical rail condition. The adopted +3 dB(A)
correction is a conservative approach to account for the deviation from typical
rail condition. |
Train
speed |
Change
of SEL with speed = 20 log (V / Vref)
dB(A) |
V
and Vref are the
average train speeds |
Distance |
Change
of Lmax with distance = 10 log (d1
/ 25) dB(A) |
d1 is the distance
between track and receiver |
Deck
Reflection |
· Viaduct
with ballast track = 0 dB(A) · Viaduct
without ballast track = 2.5 dB(A) · At-Grade
non-ballast track = 2.5 dB(A) |
Consistent
with MOL[8-10] |
Barrier
effects |
As
per Chart 6(a) of CRN[8-8] |
|
Joints
/ Crossovers |
7dB(A) |
To represent the augmentation
in noise due to thermal expansion joints. Average value of 5 dB(A) is summarised in Ref.
[8-11]. A conservative correction of 7
dB(A) which is consistent with MOL[8-10]
EIA is adopted. 2m long rail segment is used to represent a joint. |
Air
absorption |
0.2
– 0.008d |
|
Train
Frequency |
10log(N1) |
· N1
is the train frequency in 30 minutes · Frequency
(trains / direction / 30 minutes) 6
trains during nighttime 12
trains during day time |
View
Angle |
10 log (ðè/180-cos2á sinè) – 5
dB(A) |
α is the acute angle between a
line drawn through the receiver point, parallel to the track and the line
bisecting the angle view θ. θ is the view angle. |
Façade
Reflection |
2.5dB(A) |
|
To
Leq, 30 min |
10
log( 1 / 1800) |
|
Portal
Effect
Consideration
is given to the potential intermittent nature of the noise resulting from a
train passing a tunnel portal. Two potential locations have been identified
with the SCL (TAW-HUH) alignment. For
the tunnel portal at Hung Hom, installation of
absorptive lining at the interior tunnel surface can be considered near the
tunnel exit to minimise the portal effect.
With
regard to HIK, trains travelling in and out of the station are running at a
reduced speed and the station shelter provided some buffer to reduce the
aerodynamic effect. Therefore,
significant portal effect is not expected at HIK.
Cumulative Airborne Railway Noise Impacts
There would be cumulative air-borne train noise
impacts at the following locations.
Location |
Cumulative Train Noise Sources |
Tai
Wai |
·
Existing East Rail |
Hung
Hom |
·
Existing East Rail within HUH ·
SCL (MKK – HUH) |
The
surroundings at the Tai Wai and Hung Hom exposed sections have been reviewed. Following the
opening of SCL (TAW-HUH), the cumulative noise impact from East Rail have been
addressed by considering an assessment goal of 10 dB(A) lower than the
ANL. This approach would ensure that
noise contribution from the SCL (TAW-HUH) operation is insignificant and is considered
appropriate for these areas.
8.5.3.2 Fixed Noise Sources
Noise Sources
A summary of the fixed noise sources within the SCL (TAW-HUH) include:
·
Ventilation Building at Ma Chai
Hang;
·
Ventilation systems for each station; and
·
Train stabling sidings at DIH (with stabling trains
only).
All
the above noise sources (see Appendix
8.1 for locations) would be accommodated inside solid buildings with
louvers. Maximum allowable Sound Power
Level (SWL) for above-grade louvres and ventilation
plants will be established by considering the following:
·
Separation distances and orientation from the
nearest NSR(s); and
·
Cumulative noise impacts from noise sources of
concurrent projects (e.g. ventilation shafts) on the NSR.
Assessment Methodology
The following general procedures have been adopted for the operation noise assessment.
· Identify and locate representative NSRs that may be affected by the noise sources;
· Determine the noise criteria for both daytime and nighttime;
· Use standard acoustic principle for attenuation and directivity;
· Determine the maximum sound power levels (SWLs) of the fixed noise sources;
8.5.4
Assessment Results
– Operational Noise
8.5.4.1 Railway Noise –
Night-time and Daytime Noise Impacts
The NSRs at Festival City would be affected by the bridge section of Mei Tin Road. The slant separation distance is relatively short and the NSRs at Festival City would be overlooking the tracks. With mitigation measures in the form of top cover as shown in Appendix 8.19, no operational railway noise impact would be expected.
A summary of predictions for night-time and daytime railway noise levels are presented in Table 8.20 and Table 8.20a respectively below.
Table 8.20: Summary of Predicted
Night-time Railway Noise Levels for Topside Property Developments
NSR ID
& Noise
Sensitive Receivers |
Predicted Noise levels |
Assessment Goal |
|
1/F |
Floor with Max. Impact |
||
TAW-P1-1 |
31 |
44 (5/F) |
45[1] |
TAW-P2-1 |
34 |
44 (8/F) |
45[1] |
Note: [1] A 10dB(A)
is assumed as the noise contribution from existing East Rail Line and Intercity
Train. To take into account the cumulative
airborne noise impacts from the existing East Rail Line and Intercity Train, an
assessment goal of ANL – 10 dB(A) is adopted.
Table 8.20a: Summary of Predicted
Daytime Railway Noise Levels for Topside Property Developments
NSR ID
& Noise Sensitive
Receivers |
Predicted Noise levels |
Assessment Goal |
|
1/F |
Floor with Max. Impact[2] |
||
TAW-P1-1 |
34 |
47 (5/F) |
55[1] |
TAW-P2-1 |
37 |
47 (8/F) |
55[1] |
Note: [1]
A 10dB(A) is
assumed as the noise contribution from existing East Rail Line and Intercity
Train. To take into account the
cumulative airborne noise impacts from the existing East Rail Line and Intercity
Train, an assessment goal of ANL – 10 dB(A) is adopted.
[2] The predicted noise levels would comply with
the noise criterion even if 26 or 28 trains/direction/hour during daytime
periods are adopted.
Tai Wai Depot
Within the project boundary, the alignment runs below the podium deck of topside property development. Significant noise impact to the top side developments on both the Tai Wai Depot and to the Tai Wai Station is not anticipated.
West of Tai Wai Depot
In addition to the topside developments, 4 existing
NSRs on the west of the Tai Wai Depot have also been considered. These NSRs include the following:
(i)
TAW-7-1
: Kam Cheong Building
(i)
TAW-8-1
: Blk 2, Grandway Garden
(ii)
TAW-9-1
: Christian Alliance Cheng Wing Gee College
(iii)
TAW-10-1:
Holford Garden
A section of the alignment is illustrated in Appendix 8.18. The predicted night-time and daytime railway noise levels are summarised in Table 8.21 and Table 8.21a respectively.
Results indicate that the predicted noise impacts would comply with the assessment goal and further noise mitigation measures are not required.
Table 8.21: Summary of Predicted Night-time Railway Noise Levels with Existing Mitigation Measures.
NSR ID & Noise Sensitive Receivers |
Predicted Noise
Levels, dB(A) |
Assessment Goal[1] (LAeq,30min.) |
|
1/F |
Floor with Max.
Impact |
||
TAW-7-1 |
37 |
39 (5/F) |
45 |
TAW-8-1 |
30 |
34 (24/F) |
45 |
TAW-9-1 |
NA |
NA[2] |
NA |
TAW-10-1 |
32 |
32 (1/F) |
45 |
Notes:
[1] A 10dB(A) is assumed
as the noise contribution from existing East Rail Line and Intercity
Train. To take into account the
cumulative airborne noise impacts from the existing East Rail Line and
Intercity Train, an assessment goal of ANL – 10 dB(A) is adopted.
[2] It is assumed that there would be no noise
sensitive uses for educational institutions during night-time (2300 – 0700
hours).
Table 8.21a: Summary of Predicted Daytime Railway Noise Levels with Existing Mitigation Measures.
NSR ID & Noise Sensitive Receivers |
Predicted Noise
Levels, dB(A) |
Assessment Goal[1] (LAeq,30min.) |
|
1/F |
Floor with Max.
Impact[2] |
||
TAW-7-1 |
40 |
42 (5/F) |
55 |
TAW-8-1 |
33 |
37 (24/F) |
55 |
TAW-9-1 |
42 |
42 (1/F) |
55 |
TAW-10-1 |
35 |
35 (1/F) |
55 |
Notes:
[1] A 10dB(A) is
assumed as the noise contribution from existing East Rail Line and Intercity Train. To take into account the cumulative airborne
noise impacts from the existing East Rail Line and Intercity Train, an
assessment goal of ANL – 10 dB(A) is adopted.
[2] The predicted noise levels would comply
with the noise criterion even if 26 or 28 trains/direction/hour during day time
periods are adopted.
The current alignment between Tai Wai Depot and proposed HIK would be at-grade and uncovered. Assessment results indicate that the unmitigated impact would be 6 dB(A) above the assessment goal for some NSRs at Hin Keng Estate. It is therefore necessary to consider mitigation measures to reduce the noise impacts from SCL (TAW-HUH).
Mitigation in form of retaining wall and vertical barrier would be implemented along the rail tracks between HIK and Tai Wai stations to reduce noise impact to NSRs in the vicinity as shown in Appendix 8.19. These mitigation measures include:
· Approx. 350m of noise barrier at a height 2m from the down track level of SCL (TAW-HUH) (P1);
· Approx. 100m of noise barrier at a height 2m from the up track level of SCL (TAW-HUH) (P2);
· Approx. 150m of noise barrier at a height 3m from the up track level of SCL (TAW-HUH) (P3);
· Approx. 300m of noise barrier at a height 7m from the tail track level T2 of TAW (P4); and
· Approx. 50m of noise barrier at a height 3m from the down track level of SCL (TAW-HUH) (P5)
The
proposed barriers under SCL (TAW-HUH) are not required if the existing
retaining wall fulfil the height of the proposed
barriers.
With the implementation of the above
mitigation, the predicted noise levels would comply with the respective
criteria. The predicted night-time and daytime railway noise levels are summarised in Table 8.22
and Table 8.22a
respectively.
Table 8.22: Summary of Predicted Night-time Railway Noise Levels for NSRs between Tai
Wai Depot and HIK
NSR ID & Noise Sensitive
Receivers |
Predicted Noise levels |
Assessment Goal[1] (LAeq,30min.) |
|||
Unmitigated |
Mitigated |
||||
1/F |
Floor with Max.
Impact |
1/F |
Floor with Max.
Impact |
||
TAW-1-1 |
43 |
44 (23/F) |
28 |
39 (28/F) |
45 |
TAW-2-1 |
50 |
50 (1/F) |
41 |
43 (8/F) |
45 |
TAW-3-1 |
41 |
43 (3/F) |
39 |
41 (3/F) |
50 |
TAW-4-1 |
34 |
38 (2/F) |
34 |
38 (2/F) |
50 |
TAW-5-1 |
37 |
42 (2/F) |
37 |
41 (2/F) |
45 |
TAW-5-2 |
<20 |
<20 (2/F) |
<20 |
<20 (2/F) |
45 |
TAW-5-3 (Joyville) |
41 |
41 (1/F) |
41 |
41 (1/F) |
45 |
TAW-6-1 |
46 |
49 (34/F) |
33 |
41 (34/F) |
45 |
TAW-6-2 |
NA[2] |
NA[2] |
NA[2] |
NA[2] |
NA[2] |
TAW-6-3 |
47 |
49 (11/F) |
33 |
42 (34/F) |
45 |
TAW-6-4 |
46 |
49 (34/F) |
33 |
42 (34/F) |
45 |
TAW-P1-2 |
42 |
45 (10/F) |
42 |
45 (10/F) |
45 |
Notes :
[1] A 10dB(A) is
assumed as the noise contribution from existing East Rail and Intercity Train. To take into account the cumulative airborne
noise impacts from the existing East Rail and Intercity Train, an assessment
goal of ANL – 10 dB(A) is adopted.
[2] It is assumed that there would be no noise
sensitive uses for educational institutions during night-time (2300 – 0700
hours).
[3] Bold results indicate values exceed assessment goal.
Table 8.22a: Summary of Predicted Daytime Railway Noise levels for NSRs between Tai
Wai Depot and HIK
NSR ID & Noise Sensitive Receivers |
Predicted Noise
levels |
Assessment Goal[1] |
|||
Unmitigated |
Mitigated[2] |
||||
1/F |
Floor with Max.
Impact |
1/F |
Floor with Max.
Impact |
||
TAW-1-1 |
46 |
47 (23/F) |
31 |
42 (28/F) |
55 |
TAW-2-1 |
53 |
53 (1/F) |
44 |
46 (8/F) |
55 |
TAW-3-1 |
44 |
46 (3/F) |
42 |
44 (3/F) |
60 |
TAW-4-1 |
37 |
41 (2/F) |
37 |
41 (2/F) |
60 |
TAW-5-1 |
40 |
45 (2/F) |
40 |
44 (2/F) |
55 |
TAW-5-2 |
<20 |
<20 (2/F) |
<20 |
<20 (2/F) |
55 |
TAW-5-3 (Joyville) |
44 |
44 (1/F) |
44 |
44 (1/F) |
55 |
TAW-6-1 |
49 |
52 (34/F) |
36 |
44 (34/F) |
55 |
TAW-6-2 |
50 |
52 (7/F) |
35 |
36 (7/F) |
55 |
TAW-6-3 |
50 |
52 (11/F) |
36 |
45 (34/F) |
55 |
TAW-6-4 |
49 |
52 (34/F) |
36 |
45 (34/F) |
55 |
TAW-P1-2 |
45 |
48 (10/F) |
45 |
48 (10/F) |
55 |
Notes :
[1] A 10dB(A) is
assumed as the noise contribution from existing East Rail and Intercity Train. To take into account the cumulative airborne
noise impacts from the existing East Rail and Intercity Train, an assessment
goal of ANL – 10 dB(A) is adopted.
[2] The predicted noise levels
would comply with the noise criterion even if 26 or 28 trains/direction/hour
during day time periods are adopted.
[3]
Bold results indicate values exceed
assessment goal.
Prior
to the operation phase of the Project, a commissioning test will be conducted
for verification of EIA predictions against the assessment goals and checking
the compliance of the airborne noise levels with the NCO noise criteria.
With
the current design, HIK would have building fabrics with sufficient acoustic
attenuation. The alignment between HIK
and portal will be completely enclosed in a concrete structure of about 700mm
thick (partly as embankment and partly as viaduct) and hence would not have any
adverse noise impacts to the NSRs TAW-6-5, TAW-6-6, TAW-6-7 and TAW-6-8 in the
vicinity. The viaduct section between
HIK and Portal will be installed with Floating Slab Trackform
and no significant re-radiated noise from viaduct section would thus be
anticipated.
DIH
As
discussed in Section 2.4, there are
a number of constraints to construct the DIH underground and hence the
proposed design is to adopt a semi-underground design. It should however
be noted that the entire semi-underground DHS would be enclosed. There
would not be any tracks within the DHS and the approach tunnel sections that
would be exposed. Hence, there would not be any air-borne rail noise
impacts from the DHS and the associated tunnel sections. In addition, the
locations of planned NSRs on top of the DHS (i.e. DIH P2-1 to P2-24) have
already considered the worst case scenario and no adverse noise impacts are
envisaged.
HUH
As discussed in Section 8.4.1, two sections of the alignment are running on exposed ballast track between HUH and the portal and south of HUH. As a result of the considerable setback and building screening, significant noise impacts to the nearby NSRs are not expected. The predicted night-time and daytime railway noise levels are summarised in Table 8.23 and Table 8.23a below:
Table 8.23: Summary of Predicted Night-time Railway Noise Levels for HUH
Noise Sensitive Receivers |
Predicted
Noise Level, dB(A) |
Assessment
Goal[1] (LAeq,30min.) |
|
1/F |
Floor
with Max. Impact |
||
HUH-1-3
|
39 |
39 (4/F)
/ 40 (4/F)[2] |
50[1]
(ASR C) |
HUH-3-1 |
42 |
48 (30/F) |
50[1]
(ASR C) |
HUH-4-1
|
42 |
42 (9/F) |
45[1]
(ASR B) |
HUH-4-2 |
41 |
41 (1/F) |
45[1] (ASR B) |
HUH-8-1 |
44 |
44 (6/F) |
50[1]
(ASR C) |
HUH-10-1 |
26 |
47 (10/F) |
55 (ASR B) |
Note: [1] A
10dB(A) is assumed as the noise contribution from
existing East Rail Line and Intercity Train.
To take into account the cumulative airborne noise impacts from the
existing East Rail Line and Intercity Train, an assessment goal of ANL – 10
dB(A) is adopted.
[2] Cumulative
impact from operation of SCL (MKK-HUH) is included.
Table 8.23a: Summary of Predicted Daytime Railway Noise Levels for HUH
Noise Sensitive Receivers |
Predicted
Noise Level, dB(A) |
Assessment
Goal[1] (LAeq,30min.) |
|
1/F |
Floor
with Max. Impact[2] |
||
HUH-1-3
|
42 |
42 (4/F)
/ 43 (4/F)[3] |
60[1]
(ASR C) |
HUH-3-1 |
45 |
51 (30/F) |
60[1]
(ASR C) |
HUH-4-1
|
45 |
45 (9/F) |
55[1]
(ASR B) |
HUH-4-2 |
44 |
44 (1/F) |
55[1] (ASR B) |
HUH-8-1 |
47 |
47 (6/F) |
60[1]
(ASR C) |
HUH-10-1 |
29 |
50 (10/F) |
65 (ASR B) |
Note: [1] A
10dB(A) is assumed as the noise contribution from
existing East Rail Line and Intercity Train.
To take into account the cumulative airborne noise impacts from the
existing East Rail Line and Intercity Train, an assessment goal of ANL – 10
dB(A) is adopted.
[2] The
predicted noise levels would comply with the noise criterion even if 26 or 28
trains/direction/hour during day time periods are
adopted.
[3] Cumulative
impact from operation of SCL (MKK-HUH) is included.
Prior
to the operation phase of the Project, a commissioning test will be conducted
for verification of EIA predictions against the assessment goals and checking
the compliance of the airborne noise levels with the NCO noise criteria.
8.5.4.2 Railway Noise -
Cumulative Noise Impacts from Depot
The
fixed noise with Tai Wai depot have been considered in the approved MOS EIA study[8-10]. Their contributions to the overall noise
level are not considered in the present assessment.
8.5.4.3 Railway Noise – Maximum
Noise Level Lmax
As presented in Section 8.5.3.1, the reference maximum
noise level (Lmax) is 75.3 dB(A), for train speed of 130km/h and measured at 25m from
track. This noise level is significantly
lower than the statutory requirement of 85 dB(A). Among the identified NSRs, the topside
developments above Tai Wai station and Tai Wai depot are the closest to track
with setback distance of 25m. This setback
distance is the same as that with the reference condition and operating speed
of the trains are substantially lower than the reference condition.
In consideration of
the above comparison, exceedance of the statutory maximum noise level is not anticipated
along the alignment.
8.5.4.4 Railway Noise – 24-Hour
Average Noise Level Leq, 24 hour
Detailed schedule timetable for SCL (TAW-HUH) is not available at the time of reporting. Based on available information, it is estimated that headway over 24 hours is approximately 680 trains for both directions. Based on this assumption, the predicted 24-hour average railway noise levels would comply with the Leq 24hr criterion and are summarised in Appendix 8.20.
8.5.4.5 Fixed Noise Sources
According
to the latest design information, there would only be one ventilation building
for the SCL (TAW-HUH) at Ma Chai Hang.
Assessment
has been conducted to evaluate the maximum Sound Power Level (SWL) for the
louvers of the ventilation building. The orientation and locations of louvers
has been based on latest information provided by the detail design consultant.
Other than the ventilation building at Ma Chai Hang,
the ventilation shafts in different stations have also been included in the
assessment.
Locations
of assessment point for fixed noise sources are shown in Figure 8.2.1 to
8.2.5. The predicted maximum
allowable Sound Power Level (SWL) are summarised in Table 8.24 below. Detailed calculations are presented
in Appendix 8.21.
Table 8.24 : Maximum Allowable SWL for the Ventilation Building and Ventilation Shafts
Station/Location |
Plant Item |
Plant ID |
Maximum allowable Sound Power Level, dB(A) |
Remarks |
|
Daytime |
Night-time |
||||
Hin Keng Station |
Ventilation Shaft |
VS - HIK - 1 - 1 |
96 |
88 |
|
|
(VS) |
VS - HIK - 1 - 2 |
89 |
81 |
|
|
|
VS - HIK - 1 - 3 |
89 |
81 |
|
|
|
VS - HIK - 1 - 4 |
89 |
81 |
|
|
|
VS - HIK - 1 - 5 |
90 |
82 |
|
Ma Chai Hang Ventilation Building |
Ventilation Shaft |
VS - MCV - 1 - 1 |
91 |
81 |
|
|
(VS) |
VS - MCV - 1 - 2 |
85 |
75 |
|
|
|
VS - MCV - 1 - 3 |
86 |
76 |
|
|
|
VS - MCV - 1 - 4 |
87 |
77 |
|
|
|
VS - MCV - 1 - 5 |
88 |
78 |
|
|
|
VS - MCV - 1 - 6 |
94 |
84 |
|
|
|
VS - MCV - 1 - 7 |
92 |
82 |
|
|
|
VS - MCV - 1 - 8 |
96 |
87 |
[1] |
Diamond Hill Station |
Ventilation Shaft |
VS - DIH - 1 - 2 |
85 |
75 |
|
|
(VS) |
VS - DIH - 2 - 2 |
89 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 3 - 2 |
89 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 4 - 2 |
91 |
81 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 5 - 2 |
87 |
77 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 6 - 2 |
84 |
74 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 7 - 2 |
90 |
80 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 8 - 2 |
88 |
78 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 9 - 1 |
79 |
69 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 9 - 2 |
80 |
70 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 9 - 3 |
84 |
75 |
[1] |
|
|
VS - DIH - 9 - 4 |
82 |
72 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 9 - 5 |
77 |
67 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 10 - 3 |
79 |
69 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 10 - 4 |
81 |
71 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 11 - 1 |
79 |
69 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 11 - 2 |
78 |
68 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 11 - 3 |
75 |
65 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 11 - 4 |
78 |
68 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 26 - 5 |
73 |
63 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 27 - 5 |
76 |
66 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 28 - 5 |
78 |
68 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 29 - 5 |
75 |
65 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 30 - 5 |
75 |
65 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 31 - 5 |
77 |
67 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 32 - 5 |
75 |
65 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 33 - 1 |
78 |
68 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 33 - 2 |
83 |
73 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 33 - 3 |
76 |
66 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 33 - 4 |
83 |
73 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 34 - 5 |
76 |
66 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 35 - 5 |
75 |
65 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 36 - 1 |
79 |
69 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 36 - 2 |
75 |
65 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 36 - 3 |
77 |
67 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 36 - 4 |
79 |
69 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 37 - 1 |
77 |
67 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 37 - 2 |
76 |
66 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 37 - 3 |
76 |
66 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 37 - 4 |
77 |
67 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 38 - 1 |
79 |
69 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 38 - 2 |
77 |
67 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 38 - 3 |
77 |
67 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 38 - 4 |
79 |
69 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 39 - 1 |
81 |
71 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 39 - 2 |
76 |
66 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 39 - 3 |
81 |
71 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 39 - 4 |
85 |
75 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 40 - 1 |
80 |
70 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 40 - 2 |
77 |
67 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 40 - 3 |
82 |
72 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 40 - 4 |
85 |
75 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 41 - 1 |
75 |
65 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 41 - 2 |
79 |
69 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 41 - 3 |
79 |
69 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 41 - 4 |
85 |
75 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 41 - 5 |
78 |
68 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 42 - 1 |
86 |
76 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 42 - 2 |
82 |
72 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 42 - 3 |
77 |
67 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 42 - 4 |
83 |
73 |
|
|
|
VS - DIH - 42 - 5 |
77 |
67 |
|
Fung Tak Emergency Escape Access |
Ventilation Shaft |
VS - WTS - 1 - 1 |
92 |
84 |
|
|
(VS) |
VS - WTS - 1 - 2 |
87 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - WTS - 1 - 3 |
90 |
82 |
|
|
|
VS - WTS - 1 - 4 |
93 |
85 |
|
|
|
VS - WTS - 1 - 5 |
90 |
82 |
|
Kai Tak Station |
Ventilation Shaft |
VS - KAT - 1 - 1 |
95 |
85 |
|
|
(VS) |
VS - KAT - 1 - 4 |
95 |
85 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 1 - 5 |
95 |
85 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 2 - 1 |
94 |
84 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 2 - 2 |
94 |
84 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 2 - 3 |
94 |
84 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 2 - 4 |
94 |
84 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 2 - 5 |
94 |
84 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 3 - 5 |
90 |
80 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 4 - 5 |
89 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 5 - 1 |
89 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 5 - 2 |
89 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 5 - 3 |
89 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 5 - 5 |
89 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 6 - 1 |
89 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 6 - 3 |
89 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 6 - 4 |
89 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 6 - 5 |
89 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 7 - 1 |
88 |
78 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 7 - 2 |
84 |
74 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 7 - 3 |
90 |
80 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 7 - 4 |
90 |
80 |
|
|
|
VS - KAT - 7 - 5 |
85 |
75 |
|
To Kwa Wan Station |
Ventilation Shaft |
VS - TKW - 1 - 1 |
93 |
83 |
|
|
(VS) |
VS - TKW - 1 - 2 |
85 |
75 |
|
|
|
VS - TKW - 1 - 3 |
94 |
84 |
|
|
|
VS - TKW - 1 - 4 |
101 |
91 |
|
|
|
VS - TKW - 1 - 5 |
88 |
78 |
|
|
|
VS - TKW - 2 - 2 |
109 |
101 |
[1] |
|
|
VS - TKW - 2 - 4 |
98 |
96 |
[1] |
|
|
VS - TKW - 3 - 2 |
109 |
99 |
[1] |
|
|
VS - TKW - 3 - 4 |
98 |
95 |
[1] |
|
|
VS - TKW - 3 - 5 |
98 |
94 |
[1] |
|
|
VS - TKW - 4 - 1 |
95 |
85 |
|
|
|
VS - TKW - 4 - 2 |
100 |
90 |
|
|
|
VS - TKW - 4 - 3 |
101 |
91 |
|
|
|
VS - TKW - 4 - 4 |
95 |
85 |
|
|
|
VS - TKW - 4 - 5 |
95 |
85 |
|
Ma Tau Wai Station |
Ventilation Shaft |
VS - MTW - 1 - 1 |
85 |
81 |
[1] |
|
(VS) |
VS - MTW - 1 - 2 |
89 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - MTW - 1 - 3 |
89 |
79 |
|
|
|
VS - MTW - 1 - 4 |
85 |
75 |
|
|
|
VS - MTW - 1 - 5 |
86 |
76 |
|
|
|
VS - MTW - 2 - 1 |
80 |
70 |
|
|
|
VS - MTW - 2 - 2 |
81 |
71 |
|
|
|
VS - MTW - 2 - 3 |
87 |
77 |
|
|
|
VS - MTW - 2 - 4 |
84 |
74 |
|
|
|
VS - MTW - 2 - 5 |
82 |
72 |
|
|
|
VS - MTW - 3- 1 |
85 |
75 |
|
|
|
VS - MTW - 3- 2 |
86 |
76 |
|
|
|
VS - MTW - 3- 3 |
82 |
72 |
|
|
|
VS - MTW - 3- 4 |
85 |
75 |
|
Note:
[1] Nighttime permissible sound power level in dB(A) is
excluded due to educational activities.
The
equipment should be free of the characteristics of tonality, impulsiveness and
intermittency. If the selected equipment
could not be free of characteristics of tonality, impulsiveness and
intermittency, the maximum SWL should be reduced in accordance with the
correction factors, in the range of 3 to 6 dB(A), as given in Section 3.3 of
TM-IND.
The
Contractor shall install acoustic silencers, noise barriers, acoustic
louvers where appropriate to ensure that the specified maximum SWLs shown in Table 8.24
will not be exceeded.
8.5.5
Mitigation
Measures
8.5.5.1 Operational Phase
The
detailed design should incorporate the following good practice in order to minimise the nuisance on the neighboring NSRs. In case the Contractor would change the
design and locations of the vents, they would need to comply with the
legislative maximum impacts at the receivers.
·
Louvres should be orientated away from adjacent NSRs, preferably
onto main roads which are less sensitive.
·
Direct
noise mitigation measures including silencers, acoustic louvers and acoustic
enclosures should be allowed for in the design for the ventilation building,
stations and stabling sidings.
·
The
façade for these plant areas /
ventilation shafts should have adequate sound insulation properties to minimise the noise emanating through the building fabric.
8.5.5.2 Residual Impacts and
Constraints on Future Receivers
The
operational noise generated by the proposed railway can be properly mitigated
by implementing the proposed mitigation measures. Adverse residual impacts are
not anticipated and there are no constraints on the future sensitive receivers
that could be identified at this stage.
As discussed in Section 1.2, the EIA Study Brief has included HOM and HUH. However, during the design development, it is considered that HOM be better implemented by the KTE and HUH by the SCL (MKK-HUH) and SCL (HUH-ADM). It should be noted that the assessment results in Tables 8.14, 8.15, 8.16.1a and 8.16.2a have incorporated the cumulative construction noise contributions from SCL (MKK-HUH) & SCL(HUH-ADM). Similarly, the assessment results in Table 8.23 have incorporated the cumulative airborne noise impacts from SCL (MKK-HUH). Furthermore, to take into account the cumulative airborne noise impacts from the existing East Rail Line and Intercity Train, an assessment goal of ANL-10 is adopted for NSRs which would experience cumulative impact from existing East Rail Line and Intercity Train. SCL (HUH-ADM) section is underground and no airborne operational noise impacts. Hence, the cumulative airborne noise impacts due to HOM and HUH have been assessed.
The Project would have ventilation shafts or large cooling system in HOM and HUH. There are ventilation shafts in the HOM under the KTE Project, ventilation shafts and cooling tower in the HUH under SCL (MKK-HUH) and SCL (HUH-ADM). Maximum near-field Sound Power Levels at 1m from the louvres of these ventilation shafts have been quantified in their respective EIAs. Since the louvres at HOM and HUH are located at more than 300m away from the nearest fixed noise sources of this Project, i.e. ventilation shafts of MTW, there would not be any cumulative operational noise impacts from SCL (MKK-HUH) & SCL(HUH-ADM) and KTE ventilation shafts to SCL (TAW-HUH) Projects.
Construction noise assessment has been conducted. All practicable mitigation measures have been exhausted to minimise the noise impacts. These mitigation measures include the optimisation of construction methodology (i.e. schedule of using PME), quiet plant, temporary noise barrier and good site practices. However, given the site constraints, some of the receivers (See Table 8.16.1a, Table 8.16.2a and Table 8.16.3) would still be subject to residual impacts exceeding the construction noise criterion.
Residual impacts have been assessed and considered the impacts are temporary and reversible. With all the proposed mitigation measures, the residual impact has been reduced to be minimal.
For the operational phase, mitigation with retaining wall and vertical noise barrier would be required for the at-grade track between Tai Wai Depot and HIK. Maximum sound power levels allowed to be emitted from louvers of fixed noise sources at ventilation building at Ma Chai Hang, Fung Tak Emergency Escape Access, ventilation system for stations and stabling sidings were predicted. With the proper selection of plant and adoption of noise control measure such as acoustic silencers, noise barriers, acoustic louvers, the NSRs located in the vicinity of these fixed noise sources would not be affected.
[8-1] Noise Control Ordinance (Cap 400), HKSAR dated June 1997.
[8-2] Technical Memorandum on Noise from Construction Work other
than Percussive Piling, EPD dated March 1996.
[8-3] Technical Memorandum on Noise from Percussive Piling, EPD
dated June 1999.
[8-4] Technical Memorandum on Noise from Construction Work in
Designated Areas, EPD dated June 1999.
[8-5] Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment
Process (EIA Ordinance), EPD dated September 1997.
[8-6] Technical Memorandum for the Assessment of Noise from Places
Other Than Domestic Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites.
[8-7] Kwun Tong Line Extension: Environmental Impact Assessment, MTR
Corporation Limited.
[8-8] Calculation of Railway Noise 1995, the Department of
Transport, UK.
[8-9] SEL Source Term Measurement, MTR Corporation Limited.
[8-10] Tai
Wai to Ma On Shan Extension: Environmental Impact
Assessment, Kowloon-Canton Railway Corporation, October 1999.
[8-11] “Transportation Noise Reference Book” by P.M. Nelson, published by Butterworth & Co. (Publishers) Ltd, 1987.