·
Consideration of alternative alignment options
·
Project description and construction methodology
·
Air Quality
·
Noise
·
Water Quality
·
Waste Management
·
Land Contamination
·
Hazard
·
Landscape and Visual
·
Cultural Heritage
·
Environmental Monitoring and Audit
All the existing and planned environmental
sensitive receivers in the vicinity of the alignment have been identified by
conducting site surveys and reviewing relevant planning information. The receivers identified include residential
blocks, educational institutions, clinics and place of worship etc. These
receivers have all been considered in this EIA study.
The key assessment assumptions, limitation of
assessment methodologies and all related prior agreements with EPD on
assessment of different environmental aspects are given in Appendix
15.1.
The proposed alignment of CKR has evolved through a
number of studies, aimed at minimizing the land resumption/clearance and
disruption to the public. A number of alignment options have
been considered for the west, east and central portions. These options have
been evaluated by considering a number of factors including engineering
feasibility, construction difficulties, construction and maintenance costs,
public comments, environmental factors etc.
The proposed CKR is now a dual 3-lane trunk road,
mainly in the form of tunnel, beneath Kowloon Peninsula linking the West
Kowloon Reclamation area in the west and the proposed Kai Tak Development area
in the east. It will connect the West
Kowloon Highway at Yau Ma Tei Interchange to the proposed Trunk Road T2 at Kai
Tak Development and Tseung Kwan O – Lam Tin Tunnel to form a strategic highway
link Route 6 to serve the existing and planned developments in West Kowloon,
East Kowloon and Tseung Kwan O.
Site-specific construction methodologies have been
developed comprising different tunnelling methods, including cut-and-cover
tunnel, drill-and-break tunnel, drill-and-blast tunnel and underwater tunnels.
With reference to the longitudinal and geological profile of CKR, the
cut-and-cover tunnels sections at both ends of the tunnel will involve
excavation of soil (fill) materials using non-percussive method while the
central portion of tunnel will be accomplished by the traditional drill-and-blast method within the strata of bedrock at
more than 30 m below ground.
There are a number of bridges
designed for the west portion connection roads to link up with CKR with West
Kowloon Interchange and Lin Cheung Road. The bridge
form is designed as continuous prestressed concrete box girder bridges which
are matched with the existing highway structures. Since the bridge lengths are relatively short, conventional
span-by-span construction method could provide more
feasibility in fitting different alignment change of the
bridges.
As the structural form of the elevated sections of
the connection roads in the Kai Tak Development and Kowloon Bay area is to be
designed as continuous prestressed concrete box girder bridges with relatively
short span for the flexibility to suit
different alignment changes and various interface constraints. Conventional
cast in-situ span-by-span method is to be implemented for construction of these
bridges.
Landscaped decks are designed to
beautify the west and east end portals of CKR and existing
Kowloon City Ferry Pier PTI which is generally following the vertical profile
of CKR. The landscaped decks are mainly a reinforced concrete frame structure
supporting on the cut-and-cover tunnel.
A number of government buildings and facilities may
require decanting and demolishing. However, these decanting / reprovisioning proposals are subject to
review / change in the detailed design stage. Construction of CKR cut-and-cover
tunnel underneath the YMT Police Station New Wing Building may require removal
of those affected piles. An underpinning
scheme is required to transfer the existing column loadings to a deeper rock
stratum.
The noise mitigation structures will
be designed as steel frame structures with supporting posts. Acoustic panels will be fixed on the frame to
provide sufficient sound insulation.
Quantitative
fugitive dust assessments have been conducted, taking into account the
cumulative impact caused by nearby concurrent projects. The result show that,
in general, the predicted 1-hour and 24-hour and annual TSP concentrations at
identified ASRs would comply with the respective criteria. Hence, it is
concluded that there will not be any adverse residual air quality impacts
during construction phase. Effective dust control can also be achieved by
implementing the procedures and requirements given in the Air Pollution Control
(Construction Dust) Regulation and in accordance with the EM&A programme
during construction.
All
the dredged sediment would be contained in geotextile as soon as practicable
and transported away on a daily basis. This would minimize the possibility of exposing
the dredged sediment and hence the possibility of any odour nuisance as well.
For
the assessment of operational phase air quality, it is concluded that the
predicted air quality impacts on all sensitive receivers would comply with Air
Quality Objectives.
Construction airborne 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 5.14)
would still be subject to the exceedance of the construction noise criterion.
The exceedance of the construction noise
criterion have been assessed and considered the impacts are temporary and
reversible. With all the proposed
mitigation measures, the adverse residual impact exceeding the construction noise
criterion has been reduced to be minimal.
Construction groundborne noise assessment
has also been conducted. No exceedance
of noise criteria is predicted and hence no mitigation measures are required.
For the operational phase, mitigation
measures with low noise road surface, noise barrier, semi-enclosure and full
enclosure are required to fulfill the EIAO criteria. The layout of noise sensitive uses, e.g. planned schools in Kai Tak
Development Area may be arranged in a way to avoid the sensitive facades of the
classrooms facing Project Roads to avoid unacceptable traffic noise impacts
from the surrounding road network.
Maximum allowable sound power levels allowed
to be emitted from louvers of fixed noise sources at ventilation buildings at
West Portion, Central Portion and East Portion were predicted. The re-provisioned Kowloon City Ferry Pier Public Transport
Interchange (PTI) will also
designed to no direct line-of-sight of the noise sources at the noise sensitive
uses. 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.
Potential water pollution sources
have been identified as construction runoff, sewage from site workforce,
groundwater contamination and sediment and contaminant release due to dredging for temporary fairway for marine
vessels. Mitigation
measures including covering excavated materials and providing sedimentation
tanks on-site etc. are recommended to mitigate any adverse water quality
impacts. To minimise the potential impact due to SS during sediment dredging,
deployment of silt curtains around the closed grab dredgers is recommended for
the dredging works to minimize any significant water quality impact in the
Victoria Harbour.
The operational water quality impact
for road run-off, wastewater
discharge during maintenance of ventilation and air purification system will have no adverse water quality
impact with the incorporation of mitigation measures in the design.
In order to ensure effectiveness of
the implemented mitigation, regular water quality monitoring in the Kowloon Bay
are recommended during the construction phase.
15.7
Waste
Management Implications
The quantity and timing for the generation
of waste during the construction phase have been estimated. Measures, including the opportunity for
on-site sorting, reusing excavated fill materials (stored in stockpiles) etc,
are devised in the construction methodology where practicable to minimise the
surplus materials to be disposed. The
annual disposal quantities for C&D materials and their disposal methods
have also been discussed making reference to the C&DMMP which has endorsed by PFC. The Project Proponent will
ensure all the mitigation measures mentioned in the C&DMMP will be complied
with. Wherever practicable, C&D materials should be segregated from other
wastes to avoid contamination and ensure acceptability at public filling areas
or reclamation sites. The surplus C&D material would be reused within the
site as much as possible.
In addition, quantities of
contaminated soil and dredged/ excavated sediment that would be generated
during the construction phase have also been estimated. Measures for handling
these materials have been discussed. The types and quantities of waste that would
be generated during the operational phase have also been assessed. Recommendations have been made to ensure
proper treatment and disposal of these wastes.
No dredging works is allowed to proceed until all
issues on management of dredged sediments have been resolved and all relevant
arrangements have been endorsed by the relevant authorities including MFC and
EPD. Exact location
of marine disposal of the sediment will be assigned by MFC.
The total
volume (in-situ) of disposal sediment is 218,894m3 and the quantity
of sediment that required Type 3 – Special Treatment/Disposal is 58,893m3.
15.8
Land
Contamination Impact
A land contamination assessment has been
conducted. Background information including geological conditions and selected
aerial photos has been reviewed and site survey has been conducted to identify
the potentially contaminated sites along the proposed CKR alignment.
The available soil and groundwater testing
results indicate that no RBRGs exceedances except 3 soil samples in which
concentrations of lead or PCBs were found to have exceeded the RBRGs limits for
“Urban Residential” and “Rural Residential” landuse, but not the RBRG level for
“Public Park”,
which is the more representative after-use for CKR upon completion.
Nevertheless, a confirmatory investigation is proposed in the CAR/RAP in order
to confirm the extent of the contamination identified.
Details of the confirmatory
investigation were documented in the Supplementary CAP which also addressed the
land contamination concerns in the additional works areas. A Supplementary CAR/RAP has been
prepared to provide an
update on the potential land contamination extent and remediation options.
A
quantitative risk assessment was undertaken to evaluate the hazard to life
issues associated with the transport and use of explosives during construction
of the CKR. The risk assessment pertains
to individual and societal risks criteria stipulated in Annex 4 of the
Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance Technical Memorandum (EIAO-TM).
Potential
causes of hazard events have been identified and a set of relevant scenarios
have been developed.
The
assessment results indicate the risk is acceptable in terms of individual risk
and societal risk. It is concluded that the risk associated with the transport
and use of explosives for the CKR project satisfies the Hong Kong Government
Risk Criteria set out in Annex 4 of the TM-EIAO. Hence, the hazard to life
impact due to the construction and operation of the CKR project is considered
acceptable.
During
the design development of the Project, the originally proposed fresh air supply
ventilation building at the junction of To Kwa Wan Road and San Ma Tau Street
has been deleted. Therefore the assessment on the possibility of released towngas
being drawn into the CKR tunnel under the conditions of the EIA Study Brief, is
not required.
15.10
Landscape
and Visual Impact
As the majority of the CKR is underground,
landscape and visual impacts would be restricted to above ground construction
works and operational facilities only. It is considered there will be no
substantial adverse landscape and visual impacts to the surrounding sensitive receivers during the
operation phase.
Based on the 2010 Tree Survey, about 1304 trees will be affected by the
works and need to be
removed by felling or transplanting, while approximately
2800 will be
retained. The 2010 Tree Survey estimated
approximately 163 trees would be suitable for transplanting and approximately
1141 trees will not be suitable for transplanting and would therefore require
felling. Due to the Project re-alignment and other projects development (e.g.
XRL), the number of trees affected by the CKR Project has reduced since the
2010 Tree Survey. An updated Tree Survey will be carried out (due to commence
mid 2013) and tree treatments will only be finalised during the Tree Removal
Application.
For trees unavoidably affected by
the Project that have to be removed, where practical, transplantation will be
chosen as the top priority method of removal but if this is not possible or
practical (e.g. the tree is too large or has a low survival rate), compensatory
planting will be provided for trees unavoidably felled. The felled trees will be compensated for mainly within the Project Boundary
including on the future landscape deck near the western tunnel portal but it is
likely that it will be necessary to agree additional receptor sites for some
compensatory trees (and possibly
transplanted trees). Using worst case scenario numbers, current
estimates predict additional receptor sites will be required for approximately
550 trees but given the reduced numbers of trees now affected by the Project,
particularly in the West Portion, this number is likely to be reduced.
No Registered Old and Valuable Trees are located within the Works Area
and none of these affected trees are LCSD champion Trees or Registered Old and
Valuable Trees, neither are they rare or endangered species, but mainly common
exotic trees. All the trees with high amenity values that are unavoidably
affected by the works would be transplanted where possible. Detailed tree
preservation, transplanting and felling including compensatory planting
proposals will be submitted to the relevant Government Department for approval
in due course in accordance with ETWB TC no. 3/2006.
Part of the public open spaces
within the works area will be permanently taken by connection road, tunnel
portal, ventilation building or re-provisioned community facilities,
particularly in the West Portion. All areas of public open space affected by
the Project will be re-provisioned either at the same location following the
completion of temporary works, or at a separate site, as agreed with relevant
Government departments and under the proposed development. Overall more public open space will be
re-provisioned/ reinstated than is taken during construction providing a net
benefit to the regional environment.
A number
of LRs in the East Portion are also considered to benefit from the Project once
mitigation measures have been implemented. These include Roadside Planting
along
Impact on Landscape Character Areas
(LCAs) during construction would be primarily due to construction activities
including associated temporary works for the construction of cut-and-cover
tunnel, temporary reclamation, ventilation and administration buildings and
connecting roads. After implementation of mitigation measures, there would be
moderate adverse residual impacts on the Transport Corridor Landscape (LCA1.1)
in the West Portion and the Typhoon Shelter (LCA3.4) and Transportation
Corridor Landscape (LCA3.5) in the East Portion during construction. The rest
of the LCAs would experience slight or insignificant adverse residual impacts
at this stage. With the implementation of mitigation measures, at the design
year (operation year 10), impacts from the Project on all the LCAs would be
insignificant.
Visual impact during the
construction phase would be primarily due to construction activities such as
excavation for cut and fill, temporary reclamation, piling and demolition of
existing buildings as well as actual construction of new structures such as the
ventilation and administration buildings, depressed and connecting roads and
tunnel portals including landscape deck. With implementation of mitigation
measures during construction, there would still be some substantial impacts on
VSRs adjacent or close to the CKR especially residential and GIC VSRs while
residual impacts on VSRs further away from the works would be moderate to
slight adverse except for those who will be shielded from the view by future
development in the former Kai Tak Airport area and not be affected by the
Project. After the implementation of mitigation measures in operation year 10,
visual impacts on all VSRs will be insignificant with the exception of some
slight adverse visual impacts on residential and GIC VSRs that are close to the
tunnel portal in the West Portion.
Considerable effort has been made to
integrate the CKR with KTD and overall the former
Overall, it is considered that the
adverse residual landscape and visual impacts of the proposed Project are
considered as acceptable with mitigation measures during construction and
operation phase.
15.11
Impact
on Cultural Heritage (Terrestrial & Marine Archaeology)
The
findings of the terrestrial archaeology baseline study indicated that the
impacted areas are of no or very low archaeological potential. As no adverse
impacts are expected to arise from both the
construction and operational phase of the project, no mitigation measures will be
required. As a
precautionary measure, the Antiquities and Monuments Office should be informed
immediately in case of discovery of antiquities or supposed antiquities during
the construction.
The Marine Archaeological Investigation (MAI)
was completed in two phases (The first in 2008 and the second in 2012). The Baseline Review established high marine
archaeological potential for Kowloon Bay. The 2008
geophysical survey located 8 unknown seabed objects. Diver inspection of them
identified them as modern dumped debris.
The 2012 geophysical
survey located 36 unknown seabed objects.
Diver inspection of 28 of them identified them as modern debris with no
archaeological value The eight objects that were not practicable to inspect
were deemed to have low archaeological potential due to their location
underneath the disused fuel dolphin
which is a current work site creating debris.
A
watching brief is not required. However, contractor should be alerted during the construction on the
possibility of locating archaeological remains, such as cannon and AMO shall be
informed immediately in case of discovery of antiquities or supposed
antiquities in the subject sites. No
additional mitigation is required.
15.12
Impact
on Cultural Heritage (Built Heritage)
A
built heritage survey has been conducted and a total of 18 built heritage resources have been
identified in the vicinity of the study area. Several buildings and structures will
require mitigation, including Yau Ma Tei Police Station, Tin Hau Temple,
Kowloon Methodist Church, Ma Tau Kok Animal Quarantine Depot, Kowloon City
Ferry Pier and Air raid precaution tunnels of
the K1 and K1ANetworks. The construction and operation of the
tunnel and road network will not cause any insurmountable impacts if the
proposed mitigation measures are implemented properly.
15.13
Environmental
Monitoring and Audit Requirements
It is
recommended to implement an EM&A programme throughout the entire construction
period to regularly monitor the environmental impacts on the neighbouring
sensitive receivers. All the
requirements (including dust, airborne noise, water quality, waste, land
contamination, hazard, landscape & visual, and cultural heritage) in the
EM&A Manual shall be complied with.
An Environmental Mitigation Implementation
Schedule has also been included in the EM&A Manual to summarise all the
measures, the implementation location, time frame, agency etc.
The
EIA has been conducted based on the best and latest available information
during the course of the EIA study. The findings of this EIA have provided
information on the nature and extent of environmental impacts arising from
construction and operation of the Project. The EIA has, where appropriate,
identified mitigation measures to ensure compliance with environmental
legislation and standards.
This EIA has demonstrated general compliance with the environmental standards and legislation with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures during the construction and operational phases. This EIA has also demonstrated general acceptability of the adverse residual impacts and thus the population and environmentally sensitive receivers in the vicinity of the site would be sufficiently protected. Environmental monitoring and audit mechanisms have been recommended for the construction of the Project, where necessary, to verify the effectiveness of the recommended mitigation measures. A summary of the environmental impacts associated with the Project is presented in Table 15.1.
Table 15.1 Summary of Environmental Impacts Associated with the Project
|
Sensitive Receivers/ Assessment Points |
Impact Prediction Results (Without Mitigation) |
Key Relevant Standards/ Criteria |
Extents of Exceedance (Without Mitigation) |
Impact Avoidance Measures/ Mitigation Measures |
Residual Impacts (After Implementation of Mitigation Measures) |
|
Air Quality Impact |
|||||
|
Construction Phase |
|||||
|
Existing residential, premises, educational,
industrial, clinic/ home for the aged, worship, government, institution and
community (GIC) and Recreational/ Parks in West Kowloon area, Ho Man Tin, Kai
Tak and Kwai Tsing. Future residential premises and GIC in West
Kowloon area, and Ho Man Tin. 56 assessment points (refer to
Figures 4.1.1-4.1.4) |
·
1-hour Average
TSP Conc.: 102 – 6095 µg/m3 ·
24-hour Average
TSP Conc.: 70 – 913 µg/m3Annual Average TSP Conc.: 68.4 – 91.9 µg/m3 |
·
EIAO-TM and AQO ·
1-hr Average TSP
Conc: ·
24-hr Average TSP
Conc: 260 mg/m3 ·
Annual Average
TSP Conc: 80 mg/m3 |
·
Exceed EIAO-TM
(1-hr) criterion by up to 5595 µg/m3 ·
Exceed AQO
(24-hr) criterion by up to 653 µg/m3 ·
Exceed AQO (Annual)
criterion by up to 11.9 µg/m3 |
·
Watering once per
hour on the active works areas, exposed area; and paved haul roads to reduce
dust emission ·
Dust suppression
measures stipulated in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust)
Regulation and good site practices would be carried out to further minimise
construction dust impact. |
·
Adverse residual
impacts not anticipated. |
|
Operational Phase
|
|||||
|
Existing residential, premises, educational, industrial,
clinic/ home for the aged, worship, GIC and Recreational/ Parks in West
Kowloon area, Ho Man Tin and Kai Tak. Future residential premise, educational,
hospital, worship, GIC, CDA and Recreational/ Parks in West Kowloon area, Ho
Man Tin and Kai Tak. 79 assessment points (refer to
Figures 4.6.1-4.6.3) |
NO2 ·
1-hour Average NO2
Conc.: 245 – 286 µg/m3 ·
24-hour Average
NO2 Conc.: 83 – 132 µg/m3 ·
Annual Average NO2
Conc.: 32.8 – 65.2 µg/m3 RSP ·
24-hour Average
RSP Conc.: 106 – 114 µg/m3 · Annual Average RSP Conc.: 39.9 – 43.8 µg/m3 |
·
AQO ·
1-hr Average NO2
Conc: 300 mg/m3 ·
24-hr Average NO2
Conc: 150 mg/m3 ·
Annual Average NO2
Conc: 80 mg/m3 ·
24-hr Average RSP
Conc: 180 mg/m3 ·
Annual Average
RSP Conc: 55 mg/m3 |
·
No exceedances are
predicted at all ASRs. |
·
Air purification
system (APS) is proposed to adopt to remove the pollutant concentrations
before releasing to atmosphere via the three ventilation buildings. ·
No mitigation
measures are proposed as the predicted max. NO2 and RSP concentrations are
all within the respective criteria. |
·
Adverse residual
impacts not anticipated. |
|
Airborne Noise |
|||||
|
Construction
Phase |
|||||
|
Existing
residential premises and educational institutions near West Portion, Central Portion and East
Portion of CKR. Future
residential premises near West Portion and Central Portion of CKR. 42
assessment points (refer to
Figures
5.1.1-5.3.2) |
·
Without
mitigation measures, the predicted project alone noise levels would range
from 65 to 95 dB(A). Most of the
sensitive receivers will be higher than 80 dB(A). Around 12 sensitive receivers will greater
than or equal to 90 dB(A). |
·
EIAO-TM Annex 5
for non-restricted hours for domestic premises: 75 dB(A), for educational
institution is 70 dB(A) (65 dB(A) during examination period). |
·
Exceed the
EIAO-TM noise criterion by up to 20 dB(A) for residential and 27 dB(A) for
educational institution |
·
Adoption of good
site practices, optimisation of construction methodology, quieter plant,
temporary movable noise barriers enclosure and acoustic mat to minimise
construction noise impact |
·
The mitigated
predicted project alone noise levels would range from 51 to 82 dB(A). The
exceedance of 1-7 dB(A) for 1-39 months due to construction of the Project
alone. Most of the sensitive receiver
will comply the noise criteria, 6 sensitive receivers will greater than or
equal to 80 dB(A). ·
Exceedance in
cumulative impact of 1-4 dB(A) at NSRs (E-N15 and E-N11) induced from KTD. ·
It is considered
that all practicable measures have been exhausted to minimise the adverse
residual impact. |
|
Operational Phase
(Traffic Noise) |
|||||
|
Existing
residential premises, schools, clinics, temple near West Portion and East
Portion of CKR. 63 assessment points (refer to Figures 5.1.1-5.3.2) |
· Without noise mitigation measures, the predicted
noise levels would be in the range of 46 to 84 dB(A); · The noise contribution from Project Roads would
be up to 25.6 dB(A). |
·
EIAO-TM Annex 5 |
·
Exceed the
EIAO-TM noise criterion by up to 26 dB(A) |
·
Implementation of
low noise road surfacing, vertical noise barrier, cantilevered section noise
barrier, semi-enclosure and full enclosure before the operational stage. |
·
Some of the noise
sensitive receivers will exceed the noise criteria, however, the noise
contribution from Project Roads is less than 1.0 dB(A). |
|
Operational Phase (Fixed Noise) |
|||||
|
Existing
and planned residential premises and temple in West Portion, Central Portion and
East Portion of CKR 13
assessment points (refer to
Figures
5.1.1-5.3.2) |
·
Maximum allowable
sound power level of the fixed plant was predicted to meet the relevant noise
criteria |
·
EIAO-TM Annex 5:
ANL-5dB(A) or prevailing noise level |
· No exceedance is anticipated. |
·
Louvers
should be orientated away from adjacent NSRs, preferably onto main roads
which are less sensitive. ·
Direct
noise mitigation measures including silencers and acoustic louvers should be
allowed for in the design for the ventilation buildings. ·
The louvers
of these ventilation buildings should have adequate sound insulation
properties to minimise the noise emanating through the building fabric. |
· No adverse residual impacts would be anticipated. |
|
Groundborne Noise |
|||||
|
Construction
Phase |
|||||
|
Existing
residential premises and school along proposed CKR alignment. 7
assessment points (refer to
Figure
5.1.1-5.3.2) |
·
Daytime ·
<20-46 dB(A) |
·
TM-Places ·
Daytime: 65 dB(A)
for residential premises; 60 dB(A) for education institutions and 55 dB(A) for
education institutions during examination period |
·
No exceedance was
predicted. |
·
Mitigation
measure is not required. |
·
Adverse residual
impact is not anticipated. |
|
Water Quality |
|||||
|
Construction
Phase |
|||||
|
Tai
Wan Salt Water Intake (WSR 1), Planned Kai Tak Cooling Water Intake (WSR 2)
and To Kwa Wan Typhoon Shelter (WSR 3) |
SS
Elevation ·
There
would be exceedances of SS elevations at WSR 2 and WSR 3 during dredging
works of CKR alone (Scenario C3) at wet season. ·
There
would be exceedances of SS elevations at WSR 2 and WSR 3 during dredging
works of CKR project and other projects including Trunk Road T2 (Scenario C4)
at wet season. Release
of Contaminants · Exceedance
of Cu and total PAH were predicted at WSR 3 (To Kwa Wan Typhoon Shelter)
during dredging works of CKR alone (Scenario C3) at dry season · Exceedance
of Cu and total PAH were predicted at WSR 2 (Planned Kai Tak Cooling Water
Intake) and WSR 3 (To Kwa Wan Typhoon Shelter) during dredging works of CKR
project and other projects including Truck Road T2 (Scenario C4) at dry
season. |
·
TM-EIAO; ·
Water
Pollution Control Ordinance (WPCO) (Cap. 358); ·
Technical
Memorandum on Standards for Effluents Discharged into Drainage and Sewerage
Systems, Inland and Coastal Waters (TM-DSS); · Practice Note for Professional Persons
(ProPECC) PN 1/94 |
SS
Elevation ·
The
percentage of exceedance time is less than 12%, i.e. about 8 days for the
2-month dredging period when considering CKR alone. ·
The
percentage of exceedance time would be 12% of whole dredging period when
considering CKR project and other concurrent projects including Truck Road
T2. Release
of Contaminants · Marginal exceedance of copper and total
PAH levels was predicted. |
· Install
efficient silt curtains at the point of dredging/filling to control the
dispersion of SS. · Water
quality monitoring should be implemented to ensure effective control of water
pollution · The
decent speed of grabs should be controlled to minimize the seabed impact and
to reduce the volume of over-dredging; · In
dry season, the dredging rate by closed grab dredgers for temporary marine
channel outside pipepile wall shall be less than 1500m3/day and
125 m3/hour if no concurrent projects. · In
all other scenario, the dredging rate shall be less than 750m3/day
and 62.5 m3/hour · Dredging
works shall be only for the provision marine channel. No dredging work is
required for temporary reclamation; · The
workfront of temporary reclamation shall be surrounded by cofferdams and the
associated excavation and backfilling works for temporary reclamation shall
have no contact with seawater. · Additional
silt screen to the cooling water intake shall be provided to WSR 2. · Regular water quality monitoring in the Kowloon Bay and its vicinity are recommended during the construction phase to monitoring the level of SS and copper. |
· Exceedance
due to Cu and total PAH levels were predicted in bottom layer of WSR 3 (To Kwa
Wan Typhoon Shelter) according to Australian Water Quality Guidelines for
Fresh and Marine Waters. However, these criteria are for protection of
irrigation / aquaculture and fresh water aquatic ecosystem. While WSR 3 is a
typhoon shelter only without any ecological importance and portable use, such
exceedance will not deteriorate the existing functions of WSR 3. · The
impacts are reversible once the 2 months dredging works is completed. · In
order to ensure effectiveness of the implemented mitigation, regular water
quality monitoring in Kowloon Bay and its vicinity are recommended
|
|
Operational Phase |
|||||
|
Victoria Harbour Water Control Zone |
Water
quality would be deteriorated by: · road
runoff discharge for viaduct/at-grade sections; · wastewater
discharge from APS |
· Relevant
standards/ criteria stipulated under the EIAO-TM, WPCO, TM-DDS and ProPECC
5/93 |
· N/A |
· Appropriate
and practicable mitigation measures have been proposed to control runoff from
road runoff and wastewater discharge from APS (see Section 6.9.3) |
· No
unacceptable water quality impacts would be anticipated. |
|
Waste |
|||||
|
Construction Phase |
|||||
|
Water quality, air and noise sensitive receivers at or near the Project Site, the waste transportation routes and the waste disposal site. |
· Inert
C&D Materials from construction and excavation works with a total volume
of approximately 3,444,643 m3. · 14,000m3
(in-situ) of non-inert C&D material. · General
refuse from workforce per day would be estimated once the number of workforce
becomes available. · Chemical
waste from equipment cleansing and
maintenance activities |
· EIAO-TM
Annex 7 and Annex 15 · Waste
Disposal Ordinance (Cap. 354); · Waste
Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation (Cap. · Land
(Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28); · Public
Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap. 132) - Public Cleansing and
Prevention of Nuisances Regulation; · Waste
Disposal (Charges for Disposal of Construction Waste) Regulation (Cap. 354N);
and
|
· Not applicable. |
· Standard
formwork or pre-fabrication should be used as much as possible in order to minimise
the arising of C&D materials. Any C&D materials generated would be
reused (i.e. within the site and other concurrent projects) as far as
practicable |
· No
residual impacts would be anticipated. |
|
· Operational Phase |
|||||
|
Water quality, air and noise sensitive receivers
at or near the Project Site, the waste transportation routes and the waste
disposal site. |
·
Insignificant
amount of general refuse, industrial waste and chemical wastes to be
generated from the administration
building and ventilation buildings. |
· Waste
Disposal Ordinance (Cap. 354); and · Waste
Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation (Cap. |
·
Not applicable. |
·
Employ reputable
waste collector to remove general refuse and industrial wastes from the stations
on a daily basis. ·
Follow Code of
Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Waste in
handling of chemical waste. · Employ licensed waste collector and trip-ticket
system for the collection of chemical waste. |
·
No residual
impacts would be anticipated. |
|
Land Contamination |
|||||
|
Construction
Phase |
|||||
|
Potential
land contamination sites within the Project Area |
·
157m3 of contaminated soil is
anticipated to be generated from the Project. |
·
Section 3 (Potential
Contaminated Land Issues) of Annex 19 “Guidelines for Assessment of Impact on
Sites of Cultural Heritage and Other Impacts” of the EIAO-TM. ·
Guidance Note for
Contaminated Land Assessment and Remediation” ·
Practice Guide
for Investigation and Remediation of Contaminated Land
·
|
·
The 157m3
of soil exceeded the RBRG PCBs limit for “Urban Residential” and “Rural
Residential”. |
·
Considering the minor
quantity involved, on-site reuse of the contaminated soil is recommended. |
·
No adverse
residual impacts would be anticipated. |
|
Operational Phase
|
|||||
|
Not Applicable |
Not Applicable |
·
Not Applicable |
·
Not Applicable |
·
Not Applicable |
·
Not Applicable |
|
Hazard |
|||||
|
Construction
Phase |
|||||
|
Future population in vicinity of the transportation routes of explosives and the Project Sites requiring use of explosives. |
·
The risk levels of
transport and use of explosives during construction phase of the Project to
the future population are considered “acceptable” according to the risk
guidelines and no adverse impact is expected. |
·
EIAO-TM Annex 4
and Annex 22 |
·
Not Applicable |
·
In the EIA report,
a list of recommendations was proposed for safe transport and use of
explosives as “Good Practices” to further reduce the risk. |
·
No adverse
residual impacts anticipated. |
|
Operational Phase
|
|||||
|
·
Not Applicable |
·
Not Applicable |
·
Not Applicable |
·
Not Applicable |
·
Not Applicable |
·
Not Applicable |
|
Landscape and Visual |
|||||
|
Construction
Phase |
|||||
|
·
Landscape
Resources (LRs) and Landscape Character Area (LCAs) within the Study Area ·
Visually Sensitive
Receivers (VSRs) within the Primary Zone of Visual Influence |
·
Substantial to
insubstantial significance on LRs within the Study Area ·
Moderate to
insubstantial significance on LCAs within the Study Area ·
Substantial to slight
significance on VSRs within the Primary Zone of Visual Influence |
·
EIAO – TM, ·
EIAO GN No.8/2010
·
ETWB TC(W) No.
3/2006 ·
ETWB TCW No.
8/2005 (submission is required to ArchSD for approval of the design of
ventilation and administration buildings) ·
Guidelines for
Tree Risk Management and Assessment Arrangement on an Area Basis and on a
Tree Basis’ (Jan 2011), GLTMS, DevB ·
Guidelines on
Greening of Noise Barriers, (Apr 2012), GLTMS, DevB ·
DEVB TCW No. 2/2013 – Greening on Footbridges and Flyovers; ·
Submission is
required to ACABAS for approval of any bridges and associated structures
within the public highway system |
·
Not Applicable |
·
MM1 – Detailed
Design - Landscape ·
MM2 – Detailed
Design - Visual ·
MM3 – Good Site
Management. ·
MM4 – Screen
Hoarding ·
MM5 – Lighting
Control during Construction ·
MM6 – Erosion
Control ·
MM7 – Topsoil
reuse ·
MM8 – Tree
Protection & Preservation ·
MM9 – Tree
Transplantation ·
MM10 –
Compensatory Planting ·
MM11 – Screen
planting ·
MM12 – Green Roof ·
MM13 –
Reinstatement ·
MM14 – Reprovising
of Public Open Space ·
MM15 – Landscape
enhancement |
·
Moderate adverse
to insubstantial significance on LRs within the Study Area ·
Moderate adverse
to insubstantial significance on LCAs within the Study Area ·
Substantial to
slight significance on VSRs within the
Primary Zone of Visual Influence |
|
Operational Phase |
|||||
|
·
Landscape Resources (LRs) and Landscape Character Area (LCAs) within
the Study Area ·
Visually Sensitive Receivers (VSRs) within the Primary Zone of Visual
Influence |
·
Substantial to insubstantial significance on LRs within the Study
Area ·
Slight to insubstantial significance on LCAs within the Study Area ·
Moderate to slight significance on VSRs within the Primary Zone of
Visual Influence |
·
EIAO – TM, ·
EIAO GN No.8/2010 ·
ETWB TC(W) No. 3/2006 ·
ETWB TC(W) No. 2/2004 |
·
Not Applicable |
·
MM1 – Detailed Design - Landscape ·
MM9 – Tree Transplantation ·
MM10 – Compensatory Planting ·
MM11 – Screen planting ·
MM12 – Green Roof ·
MM13 – Reinstatement ·
MM14 – Reprovising of Public Open Space ·
MM15 – Landscape enhancement ·
MM16 – Lighting Control during Operation |
·
Moderate adverse to insubstantial to slight beneficial significance on
LRs within the Study Area in Year 10 of operation ·
Slight to insubstantial significance on LCAs within the Study Area in
Year 10 of operation ·
Slight to insubstantial significance on VSRs within the Primary Zone
of Visual Influence in Year 10 of operation |
|
Cultural Heritage
|
|||||
|
Construction
Phase |
|||||
|
Sites of Archaeological Interest (Terrestrial Archaeology) |
· No impacts |
· Guidelines for Cultural
Heritage Impact Assessment · EIAO-TM Annex 10 and
Annex 19 |
· Not Applicable |
· No mitigation required; · AMO should be informed immediately
in case of discovery of antiquities or supposed antiquities during the
construction. |
· No adverse residual impacts anticipated. |
|
Sites of Archaeological Interest (Marine Archaeology) |
· There are no marine archaeological
resources that will be impacted. |
· Guidelines for Cultural
Heritage Impact Assessment · EIAO-TM Annex 10 and
Annex 19 · Guidelines for Marine
Archaeological Investigation |
· Not Applicable |
· None required for the
Marine Archaeology; · Contractor should be
alerted during the construction on the possibility of locating archaeological
remains, such as cannon and AMO shall be informed immediately in case of
discovery of antiquities or supposed antiquities in the subject sites. |
· No adverse residual impacts anticipated. |
|
Built Heritage |
· Built heritage resources
may be impacted by ground borne
vibration ·
The Yau Ma Tei Police Station may be impacted by construction works in close proximity |
· Guidelines for Cultural
Heritage Impact Assessment · EIAO-TM Annex 10 and
Annex 19 · AMO Proposed Vibration
Limits |
· Not Applicable |
· Monitoring of vibration
levels will be undertaken during the construction phase and the Alert, Alarm
and Action (AAA) vibration limit will be set at 3/4/5 mm/s and (for Grade 1
Historic Buildings) · 5/6/7.5 mm/s (for Grade 2 & 3 Historic Buildings) · For the Yau Ma Tei Police
Station (New Wing) an underpinning scheme will be implemented; Protective
covering for building exterior and buffer zone will be maintained during
construction works; · For the Yau Ma Tei Police
Station (Old Wing) a diaphragm wall construction method used to reduce
settlement and a grout curtain wall will be installed in front of the
building to absorb vibration. |
·
No adverse residual impacts
anticipated. |
|
Operational Phase
|
|||||
|
Sites of Archaeological
Interest (Terrestrial Archaeology) |
·
No impacts |
·
Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment ·
EIAO-TM Annex 10 and Annex 19 |
·
Not Applicable |
·
No mitigation required. |
·
No adverse residual impacts anticipated. |
|
Sites of Archaeological
Interest (Marine Archaeology) |
· There are no marine archaeological resources that
will be impacted. |
·
Guidelines for
Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment ·
EIAO-TM Annex 10
and Annex 19 |
· Not Applicable |
· None required for the Marine Archaeology. |
· No adverse residual impacts anticipated. |
|
Built Heritage |
· No impacts |
· Guidelines for Cultural
Heritage Impact Assessment · EIAO-TM Annex 10 and
Annex 19 |
· Not Applicable |
· No mitigation required. |
· No adverse residual impacts anticipated. |