Contents |
Chapter Title Page
Figures
Figure 14.2.1 Detailed
WKCD Basement Layout
Figure 14.2.2a Road
C Alignment And Setting Out Data (Sheet 1 of 4)
Figure 14.2.2b Road
C Alignment And Setting Out Data (Sheet 2 of 4)
Figure 14.2.2c Road
C Alignment And Setting Out Data (Sheet 3 of 4)
Figure 14.2.2d Road
C Alignment And Setting Out Data (Sheet 4 of 4)
Figure 14.2.2e Interim
Road C4 – Layout Plan and Profile
Figure 14.2.2f Road
C1 – Road Profile
Figure 14.2.2g Road
C2 – Road Profile
Figure 14.2.2h Road
C3 – Road Profile (Sheet 1 of 2)
Figure 14.2.2i Road
C3 – Road Profile (Sheet 2 of 2)
Figure 14.2.2j Road
C5 – Road Profile
Figure 14.5.1 Locations
of Water Control Zones
Figure 14.5.2 Locations
of Key Water Sensitive Receivers
Figure 14.9.2 Transect
Route for Ecological Survey
Figure 14.10.1 Baseline
Landscape Resources within the Assessment Area of Underpass Road
Figure
14.10.2 (not used)
Figure 14.10.3a Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 1 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3b Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 2 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3c Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 3 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3d Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 4 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3e Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 5 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3f Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 6 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3g Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 7 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3h Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 8 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3i Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 9 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3j Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 10 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3k Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 11 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3l Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 12 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3m Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 13 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3n Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 14 of 15)
Figure 14.10.3o Baseline
Landscape Resources Photo Record (Sheet 15 of 15)
Figure 14.10.4 Broad
Brush Tree Survey Plan
Figure 14.10.5 Baseline
Landscape Character Area within the Assessment Area of Underpass Road
Figure
14.10.6 (not used)
Figure 14.10.7a Baseline
Landscape Character Area Photo Record (Sheet 1 of 8)
Figure 14.10.7b Baseline
Landscape Character Area Photo Record (Sheet 2 of 8)
Figure 14.10.7c Baseline
Landscape Character Area Photo Record (Sheet 3 of 8)
Figure 14.10.7d Baseline
Landscape Character Area Photo Record (Sheet 4 of 8)
Figure 14.10.7e Baseline
Landscape Character Area Photo Record (Sheet 5 of 8)
Figure 14.10.7f Baseline
Landscape Character Area Photo Record (Sheet 6 of 8)
Figure 14.10.7g Baseline
Landscape Character Area Photo Record (Sheet 7 of 8)
Figure 14.10.7h Baseline
Landscape Character Area Photo Record (Sheet 8 of 8)
Figure 14.10.8 Locations
of VSRs located within the Primary Zone of Visual Influence
Figure 14.10.9a Photos
of VSR 1 to VSR 4
Figure 14.10.9b Photos
of VSR 5 to VSR 9
Figure 14.10.9c Photos
of VSR 10 to VSR 11
Figure 14.10.9d Photos
of VSR 12 to VSR 16
Figure 14.10.9e Photos
of VSR 18 to VSR 21
Figure 14.10.10 Location
of Ventilation Exhaust/ Shaft for Underpass Road during Transition Period
Figure 14.10.12 Locations
and Sections of Notional Louvres within the Buildings at the WKCD
Figure 14.10.13a Photomontages
1A & 1B - Viewpoint 14 (Gateway Tower)
Figure 14.10.13b Photomontages
1C & 1D - Viewpoint 14 (Gateway Tower)
Figure 14.10.14 List
of Landscape Mitigation Measure for Underpass Road
Figure 14.10.15 Proposed
Landscape Concept Plan
Figure 14.10.16 Landscape
Concept Plan for Park
Figure 14.10.17 Landscape
Concept for the Avenue
Figure 14.10.18 Landscape
Concept for Landscape Deck Connecting WKT
Appendices
Appendix 14.4.2 Unmitigated
Road Traffic Noise Impact (Year 2032) – Permanent Access at Canton Road
Appendix 14.4.3 Unmitigated
Road Traffic Noise Impact (Year 2032 – without Project)
14. EIA
on
|
14.1.1 Background
The idea and form
of developing a site of approximately 40 ha on the northern shore of the
magnificent Victoria Harbour of Hong Kong for arts and cultural facilities has
had a rich history of discussion in the
In terms of
planning, the community remarked that the WKCD should not be seen as an
isolated development. Accessibility from and connectivity to the neighbouring
community should be carefully thought through to help integrate the arts and
cultural facilities in the WKCD with its neighbouring areas with a view to
cultivate cultural ambience in the district and its immediate vicinity. Ample
open space and a vibrant harbour-front should be provided to respond to the
growing trend towards lowering building density, greater public awareness about
good harbour-front planning and rising public aspiration for quality of life.
The
West Kowloon Cultural District Authority (WKCDA), empowered by the WKCDA
Ordinance (Cap. 601), was set up by the Government with the full support of the
Legislative Council (LegCo) in October 2008 to take forward the WKCD project.
The WKCDA is
responsible for the preparation of a comprehensive Development Plan (DP). The DP was submitted to the Town Planning Board
(TPB) on 20 December 2011 in accordance with the WKCDA Ordinance (Cap. 601). The draft DP (No. S/K20/WKCD/1) was
gazetted under section 5 of the Town Planning Ordinance (Cap. 131) on 30 March
2012. On 8 January 2013, the Chief Executive in Council, under section 9(1)(a) of the Town Planning Ordinance (Cap. 131), approved the
draft DP. The approved DP (No. S/K20/WKCD/2) now serves as the basis for implementation. The project area and
project layout to be taken forward in this Schedule 2 EIA is shown in Figures 14.1.1.
14.1.2 Designated Projects under the EIA Ordinance
The Project referred to in this chapter is the individual Schedule 2 Designated Project “an underpass more than 100m in length under the built areas (Item A.9, Part I, Schedule 2)”, which forms part of the Schedule 3 project for the WKCD development.
14.1.3 Objectives of the EIA Study
In accordance with the EIA Study Brief (ESB-237/2011) issued on 21 November 2011, the EIA Study aims to provide information on the nature and extent of environmental impacts arising from the construction and operation of the Project and associated works that will take place concurrently. This information will contribute to decisions by the Director of Environmental Protection on:
(i) the overall acceptability of any adverse environmental consequences that are likely to arise as a result of the Project and associated works, and their staged implementation;
(ii) the conditions and requirements for the detailed design, construction and operation of the Project to mitigate against adverse environmental consequences; and
(iii) the acceptability of residual impacts after the proposed mitigation measures are implemented.
Section 2.1 of the EIA Study Brief sets out the specific objectives of the EIA study as follows:
(i) to describe the Project and associated works together with the requirements and environmental benefits for carrying out the Project;
(ii) to identify and describe elements of community and environment likely to be affected by the Project and/or likely to cause adverse impacts to the Project, including natural and man-made environment and the associated environmental constraints;
(iii) to provide information on the consideration of alternative options of the Project including alternative scale/size, extent, layout, configuration/orientation, alignment, design and construction methods with a view to avoiding and minimizing potential environmental impacts to environmentally sensitive areas and sensitive uses; to compare the environmental benefits and dis-benefits of different options; to provide reasons for selecting the preferred option(s) and to describe the part environmental factors played in the selection of preferred option(s);
(iv) to identify and quantify emission sources, including air and gaseous emission, noise emission, sewage and wastewater emission, waste generation, contaminated materials, and determine the significance of impacts on sensitive receivers and potential affected uses;
(v) to identify and quantify any potential losses or damage to flora, fauna and natural habitats;
(vi) to identify and systematically evaluate any potential landscape and visual impacts and to propose measures to mitigate these impacts;
(vii) to propose the provision of infrastructure or mitigation measures so as to minimize pollution, environmental disturbance and nuisance during construction and operation of the Project;
(viii) to investigate the feasibility, practicability, effectiveness and implications of the proposed mitigation measures;
(ix) to identify, predict and evaluate the residual environmental impacts (i.e. after practicable mitigation) and the cumulative effects expected to arise during the construction and operation phases of the Project in relation to the sensitive receivers and potential affected uses;
(x) to identify, assess and specify methods, measures and standards, to be included in the detailed design, construction and operation of the Project which are necessary to mitigate these environmental impacts and cumulative effects and reduce them to acceptable levels;
(xi) to investigate the extent of the secondary environmental impacts that may arise from the proposed mitigation measures and to identify constraints associated with the mitigation measures recommended in the EIA study, as well as the provision of any necessary modification;
(xii) to identify, within the study area, any individual project(s) that fall under Schedule 2 of the EIAO; to ascertain whether the findings of this EIA study have adequately addressed the environmental impacts of those projects; and where necessary, to identify the outstanding issues that need to be addressed in any further detailed EIA study; and
(xiii) to design and specify environmental monitoring and audit requirements to ensure the effective implementation of the recommended environmental protection and pollution control measures.
14.1.4 Key Environmental Issues
The EIA study shall address the likely key issues specified under Clause 3.2 of the EIA Study Brief, together with any other key issues identified during the course of the EIA study:
(i) the potential air quality impact on sensitive receivers from the construction and operation of the Project and associated works, and the potential air quality impact on the Project from the air pollutant emission sources (such as vehicular emission, exhaust gas from ventilation buildings, emission from marine vessels); the potential odour impacts and nuisances from New Yau Ma Tei Typhoon Shelter, with a view to assessing and recommending sound engineered mitigation proposal(s) to avoid or minimize such impacts and nuisances to the maximum extent practicable;
(ii) the potential noise impact on sensitive receivers caused by the Project and associated works, including the impact from construction equipments during construction and operational noise impacts from road traffic, fixed noise sources, marine traffic, railways and helicopter (if applicable);
(iii) the potential water quality impact caused by the Project and associated works, such as works associated with modification of seawalls, drainage and sewerage provisions, spent cooling water discharges, overflow bypass of sewage pumping stations (if applicable) and dredging works of other marine structures (if applicable);
(iv) the potential sewerage and sewage treatment implications, taking into account the staged implementation of planned developments within the Project;
(v) the potential impacts of various types of wastes, including excavated materials from construction works, construction and demolition wastes, and chemical wastes generated from the construction and operation of the Project and associated works;
(vi) the potential land contamination issue within the Project site;
(vii) the potential landscape and visual impacts caused by the construction and operation of the Project, which involves the introduction of a new urban development at a prominent location of the Victoria Harbour, including day-time and night-time visual impact from the Project;
(viii) the potential impact on ecological sensitive areas, the assessment of which shall be based on a field survey of at least 4 months covering the wet and dry seasons;
(ix) the potential fisheries impacts, if the dredging works associated with the construction of the possible piers/viewing platform will be involved in the Project; and
(x) potential cumulative environmental impacts of the Project, through interaction or in combination with other existing, committed and planned projects in the vicinity of the Project (such as Hong Kong Section of Guangzhou - Shenzhen - Hong Kong Express Rail Link, Road Works at West Kowloon, Proposed Road Improvement Works in West Kowloon Reclamation Development Phases I and II, Central Kowloon Route), and that those impacts may have a bearing on the environmental acceptability of the Project.
14.1.5 Use of Relevant Studies
This Schedule 2 EIA has made use of previous findings from the preliminary environmental assessments conducted as part of the Conceptual Plan Options for the WKCD project completed between 2010 and 2011. Previously approved EIA reports have also been referred to in this study, including the following:
¡ Hong Kong Section of the Guangzhou – Shenzhen – Hong Kong Express Rail Link;
¡ Road Works at West Kowloon; and
¡ Kowloon Southern Link.
14.1.6 Structure of the Schedule 2 EIA Report
This Schedule 2 EIA report has been structured as follows:
¡ Section 14.2 – Project Description presents a description of the project including consideration of alternative options and concurrent projects
¡ Section 14.3 – Air Quality Impact presents the approach, findings and recommendations from the air quality impact assessment
¡ Section 14.4 – Noise Impact presents the approach, findings and recommendations from the noise impact assessment
¡ Section 14.5 – Water Quality Impact presents the approach, findings and recommendations from the water quality impact assessment
¡ Section 14.6 – Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Implication presents the approach, findings and recommendations from the sewerage and sewage assessment
¡ Section 14.7 – Waste Management Implication presents the approach, findings and recommendations from the waste assessment
¡ Section 14.8 – Land Contamination presents the approach, findings and recommendations from the land contamination assessment
¡ Section 14.9 – Ecological (Terrestrial) Impact presents the approach, findings and recommendations from the terrestrial ecology impact assessment
¡ Section 14.10 –Landscape and Visual Impact presents the approach, findings and recommendations from the landscape and visual impact assessment
¡ Section 14.11 – Environmental Monitoring and Audit Requirements summarises the environmental monitoring and audit requirements specified in Section 14.3 to 14.10
¡ Section 14.12 – Conclusions summarises the findings and recommendations from the environmental impact assessment
¡ Section 14.13 – Implementation Schedule of Mitigation Measures summarises the schedule for implementation of mitigation measures specified in Section 14.3 to 14.10
14.2.1 Existing Site Conditions
The site for the underpass road is located within the proposed WKCD site as shown in Figure 14.1.1. The site is currently zoned as “West Kowloon Cultural District Development Plan Area” under the Approved South West Kowloon Outline Zoning Plan (No. S/K20/28) gazetted on 8 January 2013, and combined with the proposed WKCD basement, comprises approximately 15ha of land bordering the Jordan/Tsim Sha Tsui area. The site reserved for the underpass road is currently occupied by works sites, local roads, temporary storage / parking facilities, some existing infrastructure and utility facilities, the existing Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station and the works site and temporary works areas for the Hong Kong Section of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL) project.
14.2.2 Project Components
The underpass road forms part of the infrastructure and supporting facilities for the WKCD development, in particular it is an integral part of the WKCD basement structure. The underpass road is located mainly on the WKCD Basement Level 1 (B1) (between +0.6mPD and +1.65 mPD), except at the vehicular access points where the underpass road connects to existing ground level roads adjacent to the WKCD site. There are three access points to the underpass road (shown in Figure 14.2.1), one at Lin Cheung Road underpass, one at the junction with the proposed WKCD Park drive (extension of Nga Cheung Road), and one at Canton Road. Due to the delayed relocation of the Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station, the access point at Canton Road will not be constructed until after relocation of the Fire Station, and an interim access point will be provided at Austin Road West until the permanent access point at Canton Road is constructed, after which the interim access road will be closed off permanently. After entering WKCD, there will be a carriageway route along the centre of the basement at +0.6mPD which provides access to each building development. In addition, the access also connects the carpark, coach parking and loading/unloading areas inside the basement.
The proposed underpass road is approximately 1400m in length which is comprised of three distinct sections (shown in Figure 14.2.1).
Section
I comprises the underpass road with approach ramps linking up the Canton Road /
Interim Austin Road West entrance (at level +5mPD) and the central roundabout
at the Lin Cheung Road entrance (at level +0.6mPD) is a 10.3m standard wide
single 2 lane carriageway with service roads on either side for loading /
unloading facilities. A full highway standard headroom
of 5.1m is provided such that all vehicle types can enter into the basement
level. The central
Section II (at level +0.6mPD) continues from Section I as a 6.75m standard dual 2 lane road east-west to an internal roundabout of 45m in diameter. Pick up/drop off lay-bys are provided along the basement driveway. This section has links to a service road running along the northern perimeter of the site, and access points to the carpark at Basement Level 2 (B2) (at level -5mPD).
Section
III continues from the internal roundabout and routes south and then west
before rising in level to clear the existing MTRC railway tunnels and connect
to the
Vehicles
accessing the district will mainly use the depressed junction at
14.2.3.1 Purpose and Objective of the Project
The main purpose of the underpass road is as one of the measures to meet the ‘accessibility and connectivity’ aspect of the overall WKCD development objectives mentioned in Section 14.1.1. With a site area of approximately 40ha, the WKCD development requires a central road network to ensure effective movement of people and goods from east to west. The original design for the underpass road is based on Foster + Partners Conceptual Plan (CP) for the WKCD, in which one of the main objectives of the WKCD is to provide a people-dominated and traffic-free environment at ground level. This led to integration of this east – west road with the WKCD basement to form the underpass road under this study.
14.2.3.2 Environmental Benefits of the Project
The main environmental benefit that can be attained from the Project is with respect to noise. As the main ‘spine’ of the vehicular network within the WKCD site, locating this at basement level will avoid any traffic noise impact above ground, and will also free up more space at ground level to maximise pedestrianisation and to allow for provision of landscaping and planting to enhance the landscape and visual aspect of the WKCD development.
14.2.3.3 Scenario with the Project
The
WKCD is an important strategic project that will support Hong Kong’s
development as a creative economy and global metropolis, and is a major
initiative to meet the long-term infrastructure needs of
14.2.3.4 Scenario without the Project
In the absence of this main underpass road through WKCD, there will be no direct vehicular access to WKCD facilities. Access will be restricted to the adjacent external roads at the northern and eastern perimeter of the WKCD development, where visitors/workers have to disembark and complete the remainder of their journey by foot. While this may be acceptable for tourists and commuters, it would be impractical for operation of the CACF and other facilities, which would involve a large crowd of people attending various functions, events or performance activities and require regular transfer of potentially large and fragile goods/equipment for specific arts/cultural events. Alternative access may be provided by individual local vehicular access routes to each WKCD facility, but this will create a very inefficient road network that not only takes up valuable space but may also create traffic and congestion problems. The environmental implications of this includes increased idling vehicular emissions, possible noise nuisance from irritated drivers, and cumulative impacts on operation of nearby road networks such as Canton Road and Austin Road West.
14.2.4 Consideration of Alternative Development Options
The underpass road was conceived as part of the CP design by Foster + Partners. Their justification for proposing an underground road was to provide a people-dominated and traffic-free environment at ground level, i.e. to prioritise pedestrians and public transport over private vehicles. However, possible alternative options for this main WKCD road include provision of a ground level road, or an elevated (bridge) road. Table 14.2.1 compares the environmental benefits and disbenefits of these three road options.
Table 14.2.1: Comparison of environmental benefits and disbenefits of options for the main WKCD road
|
Underpass Road |
|
Elevated Road |
Preferred Option |
Air Quality |
Dust will be generated during construction phase. During operation phase, vehicular emissions confined within enclosed space, requires extraction via ventilation systems. ASRs such as residences and visitors to WKCD amenities mostly indirectly affected. |
Dust will be generated during construction phase. During operation phase, vehicular emissions unconfined and emitted at ground level. ASRs such as residences and visitors to WKCD amenities may be directly affected. |
Dust will be generated during construction phase. During operation phase, vehicular emissions unconfined and emitted above ground level. ASRs such as residences and visitors to WKCD amenities may be directly affected. |
Underpass Road may be preferable as emission points can be planned and designed for least impact on nearby ASRs. |
Noise |
Noise will be generated from use of PME during construction phase. During operation phase, vehicular noise confined to underground space. No noise impact on above ground NSRs. |
Noise will be generated from use of PME during construction phase. During operation phase, vehicular noise unconfined at ground level. NSRs at or near ground level may be directly affected. |
Noise will be generated from use of PME during construction phase. During operation phase, vehicular noise unconfined above ground level. NSRs above ground level may be directly affected. |
Underpass Road |
Waste |
Excavation activities will generate a relatively larger amount of C&D materials. |
A small amount of C&D materials will be generated from site formation activities. |
Some C&D materials will be generated from site formation and substructure construction works. |
|
Landscape & Visual |
Construction site will generate landscape and visual impacts during construction phase. During operation phase, ground level areas will be free for landscaping and planting. Visual impact limited to temporary ventilation shafts. |
Construction site will generate landscape and visual impacts during construction phase. During operation phase, there will be permanent loss of area for landscaping. Visual impact can be mitigated with streetscaping. |
Construction site will generate landscape and visual impacts during construction phase. During operation phase, there will be some loss of area for landscaping. Significant visual impact to nearby VSRs. May not be effectively mitigated. |
Underpass Road |
Based
on the comparison results, the underpass road option is clearly the most
environmentally preferable option to adopt, with the exception of waste
generation. However, avenues for reuse and recycling of excavation materials,
both within WKCD site and by other projects within
14.2.5 Consideration of Alternative Construction Methods and Sequences of Works
For construction of the underpass road, the major construction activities comprise excavation, road paving, and utilities laying (for associated roadside lighting and signs). Excavation is by far the most significant component of the construction activities involved, and alternatives for road paving and utilities laying are insignificant in comparison, hence only the alternative construction methods for excavation is discussed. It should be noted that the underpass road is an integral component of the WKCD basement, and must be constructed as part of the basement. Therefore, construction of the underpass road is affected by the same constraints affecting construction of the WKCD basement, and only the cut and cover excavation method is feasible for the soft ground that comprises the WKCD site.
Two
options for open cut excavation are available: open cut with temporary cut
slopes, or via excavation lateral support (ELS) system. The temporary cut slope
option is the simplest method for open cut excavation,
however this requires extensive working space surrounding the excavation to
provide stable temporary cut slopes. As the WKCD basement extends close to the
site boundary which is bounded by
For
disposal of the excavated materials, two options are considered: disposal by
trucks, or disposal by barges. Construction of the WKCD basement is anticipated
to generate large quantities of excavated materials that require off-site
disposal on a daily basis. Disposal by trucks must make use of the existing
road network and may generate additional dust and noise impacts. The trucks
will also add to the already high traffic volumes on
The construction sequencing for the underpass road is directly tied to that for the WKCD basement, and there are two sequencing options available:
¡ Construction as one whole entity at the same time; or
¡ Construction as subdivided zones at different times.
To construct the basement as one whole entity would require a huge number of construction plant and equipment working in synchronisation. While this is technically feasible, from an environmental perspective, this option would potentially generate the greatest magnitude of construction phase impacts due to the huge extent and number of plant operating on the WKCD site at the same time. Construction as subdivided zones provides greater flexibility for construction of the basement as it allows different parts of the basement to be constructed at different times according to a more optimised schedule, which is technically preferred as it reduces the construction of the basement to more manageable units and the magnitude of environmental impacts, particularly construction dust and noise impacts, can be reduced.
14.2.6 Preferred Scenario
Based on the considerations described in Section 14.2.5, the preferred construction scenario for the underpass road is excavation via ELS and disposal by barges (with trucks used for transporting the excavated materials from the excavation area to the barging point) as this method offers the best technical solution for the specific requirements and constraints of the WKCD site, and environmental impacts are minimised compared to other options. The preferred construction sequence is to adopt construction as subdivided zones as this as this enables more optimised scheduling of construction and reduces the magnitude of environmental impacts.
14.2.7 Proposed Project Programme
It is targeted to commence construction of the critical elements of the WKCD in 2013 so as to commission the Phase 1 arts and cultural facilities in stages starting from 2014/2015. As construction of the underpass road is integrated with construction of the WKCD basement, the programme for this Schedule 2 Project is the same as that for the basement in Zones 1 to 3 shown in Appendix 2.4, i.e., scheduled to be completed by 2017.
The following major projects under planning and/or construction are likely to interface with this Schedule 2 EIA:
¡ West Kowloon Cultural District Development;
¡ Hong Kong Section of the Guangzhou – Shenzhen – Hong Kong Express Rail Link;
¡ Road Works at West Kowloon;
¡ Road Improvement Works in West Kowloon Reclamation Development – Phases I and II; and
¡ Central Kowloon Route.
A summary of the concurrent projects for which potential cumulative impacts have been considered is shown in Table 14.2.2.
Table 14.2.2: List of concurrent projects for cumulative impact assessment
|
Potential Cumulative Impacts |
|
Concurrent
Project |
Construction Phase |
Operation Phase |
|
All Areas |
All Areas |
Hong Kong Section of the |
Fugitive Dust Airborne Noise Landscape & Visual |
Fixed Plant Noise Groundborne Noise Landscape & Visual |
Road Works at |
Fugitive Dust Airborne Noise Landscape & Visual |
Vehicular Emissions Traffic Noise Landscape & Visual |
Road Improvement Works in |
Fugitive Dust Airborne Noise Landscape & Visual |
Vehicular Emissions Traffic Noise Landscape & Visual |
Central |
Fugitive Dust |
Vehicular Emissions |
This section presents the assessment of potential air quality impacts associated with the construction and operational phase of the proposed underpass roads within the WKCD site. Dust generated from various construction activities is the primary concern during the construction phase. During the operation phase the major sources of air pollution include, but are not limited to; vehicular emissions in the vicinity of and within the project area including from open roads, ventilation shafts, tunnel portals and from the nearby Western Harbour Crossing (WHC) portal; marine emissions from the nearby China Ferry Terminal, Ocean Terminal and New Yau Ma Tei Public Cargo Working Area (NYPCWA). Representative Air Sensitive Receivers (ASRs) within 500 m of the subject site have been identified and the worst case impacts on these receivers will be assessed. Suitable mitigation measures, where necessary, have been recommended to protect the nearby sensitive receivers and to achieve the legislative criteria and guidelines.
14.3.1 Air Quality Legislations, Standards and Guidelines
The following legislation and regulations provide the standards and guidelines for evaluation of air quality impacts and the type of works that are subject to air pollution control:
¡ Environmental Impact
Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) (Cap. 499.S16), EIAO-TM, Annexes 4 and 12;
¡ Air Pollution Control
Ordinance (APCO) (Cap. 311) and the Air Quality Objectives (AQO);
¡ Air Pollution Control
(Construction Dust) Regulation;
¡ Control of Air Pollution in
Car Parks (ProPECC PN 2/96);
¡ Practice Note on Control of
Air Pollution in Vehicle Tunnels, and;
¡ Guidance Note on the Best
Practicable Means for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant) BPM 3/2
14.3.1.1 Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process
The criteria and guidelines for evaluation of air quality impacts are laid out in Annex 4 and Annex 12 of the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM). Annex 4 stipulates the criteria for evaluating air quality impacts. This includes meeting the Air Quality Objectives and other standards established under the Air Pollution Control Ordinance, as well as meeting the hourly Total Suspended Particulate concentration of 500 µg/m3. Annex 12 provides the guidelines for conducting air quality assessments under the EIA process, including determination of air sensitive receivers, assessment methodology and impact prediction and assessment.
14.3.1.2 Air Pollution Control Ordinance
The principal legislation for the management of air quality is the Air Pollution Control Ordinance (APCO) (Cap 311). The APCO specific Air Quality Objectives (AQOs) which stipulate the statutory limits of air pollutants and the maximum allowable numbers of exceedance over specific periods. The AQOs are summarised in Table 14.3.1.
Table 14.3.1: Hong Kong Air Quality Objectives
Pollutant |
Averaging
Time |
AQO concentration (µg/m³) |
Allowable exceedances |
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) |
1 hour |
800 |
3 |
24 hour |
350 |
1 |
|
Annual |
80 |
0 |
|
Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) |
1 hour(1) |
500(1) |
|
24 hour |
260 |
1 |
|
Annual |
80 |
0 |
|
Respirable Suspended Particulates (RSP) |
24 hour |
180 |
1 |
Annual |
55 |
0 |
|
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) |
1 hour |
300 |
3 |
24 hour |
150 |
1 |
|
Annual |
80 |
0 |
|
Carbon Monoxide (CO) |
1 hour |
30,000 |
3 |
8 hour |
10,000 |
1 |
|
Ozone (O3) |
1 hour |
240 |
3 |
Lead |
3 month |
1.5 |
0 |
Note (1) The criterion under EIAO-TM not an
AQO
14.3.1.3 Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation
The Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation enacted under the APCO defines notifiable and regulatory works activities that are subject to construction dust control, as listed below:
Notifiable
Works:
1. Site formation
2. Reclamation
3. Demolition of a building
4. Work carried out in any part of a tunnel that is within 100 m of any exit to the open air
5. Construction of the foundation of a building
6. Construction of the superstructure of a building
7. Road construction work
Regulatory Works:
1. Renovation carried out on the outer surface of the external wall or the upper surface of the roof of a building
2. Road opening or resurfacing work
3. Slope stabilisation work
4. Any work involving any of the following activities:
a. Stockpiling of dusty materials
b. Loading, unloading or transfer of dusty materials
c. Transfer of dusty materials using a belt conveyor system
d. Use of vehicles
e. Pneumatic or power-driven drilling, cutting and polishing
f. Debris handling
g. Excavation or earth moving
h. Concrete production
i. Site clearance
j. Blasting
Notifiable works require that advance notice of activities shall be given to EPD. The Regulation also requires the works contractor to ensure that both notifiable works and regulatory works are conducted in accordance with the Schedule of the Regulation, which provides dust control and suppression measures.
14.3.1.4 Practice Note on Control of Air Pollution in Car Parks and in Vehicle Tunnels
The practice note for professional persons ProPECC PN 2/96 and the Practice Note on Control of Air Pollution in Vehicle Tunnels prepared by EPD provide guidance on the control of air pollution in car parks and vehicle tunnels respectively. These two practice notes include air quality guidelines required for the protection of public health and factors that should be considered in the design and operation of car parks and vehicle tunnels in order to achieve the required air quality. The limits for air pollutants as recommended by the two practice notes are summarised in Table 14.3.2.As there will be fully enclosed vehicle roads and car parks inside the proposed WKCD basement, the air quality within the basement will need to comply with the relevant air pollutant limits as given in the Table.
Table 14.3.2: Limits of air pollutant concentrations inside car parks
Air Pollutant |
Averaging Time |
Maximum Concentration (μg/m3) |
Parts Per Million (ppm) |
Remark |
Carbon Monoxide (CO) |
5 minutes |
115,000 |
100 |
Applicable to both car parks and vehicle tunnels |
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) |
5 minutes |
1,800 |
1 |
Ditto |
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) |
5 minutes |
1,000 |
0.4 |
Applicable to vehicle tunnels only |
* Concentrations at reference conditions of 298K and 101.325kPa.
14.3.1.5 Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant) BPM 3/2
This note lists the minimum requirement for meeting the best practicable means for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant). The guidance note includes: emission limits; fugitive emission control recommendations; monitoring requirements; commissioning details, and; operation and maintenance provisions. This guidance note is relevant because concrete batching plant currently used by the adjacent XRL project would be handed over to and used by the WKCD Project during the construction phase.
14.3.2 Baseline Conditions
14.3.2.1 Site Description
The underpass
road lies within the WKCD site on the south-western
tip of the
Land
uses surrounding the proposed underpass road are mainly comprised of residential,
commercial and government/institution/community (GIC) use. The underpass road boundary is flanked by
primary distributor roads:
The site for the proposed underpass road is flat to undulating with a ground level of 5 to 23 mPD, the surrounding terrain is flat.
14.3.2.2 Meteorology
The PATH (Pollutants in the Atmosphere and
their Transport over
Features of the wind profile that are
significant for the site are both the wind speed and wind direction. Low wind
speeds are significant for dispersion of non buoyant area sources. At high wind
speeds, dust emissions can become significant.
At the site, winds from the northeast are
frequent in the autumn and winter. Significant sources that lay to the
northeast of the site include
Graph
14.1 shows seasonal windroses for the site from
PATH data at grid (28, 27). PATH uses wind data based on meteorology
information from 2010.
Graph 14.1: Seasonal windroses for the underpass road site from 2010 PATH data at grid (28, 27)
14.3.2.3 Air Sensitive Receivers
The existing and planned representative Air Sensitive Receivers (ASRs) that could be effected by the underpass road Project within 500 m from its site boundary have been identified and are summarised in Table 14.3.3. The final use of each of the parcels may change in the future; therefore, ASRs have been assessed at a variety of intervals up to the proposed maximum height of the buildings that are currently planned. Receptors are located every four metres from 4 m to 20 m and every 10 metres from 20 m to the maximum height of the proposed building. A bias is generated towards the lower levels as this is where the maximum pollutant concentrations are expected to occur.
A
field study of the selected existing
ASRs external to the underpass road boundary was undertaken and the fresh air
intake and residential levels were estimated based on a visual survey. Fresh
air intakes for low level commercial property were assumed to be at podium
level or where ventilation ducts were identified. Residential receptors were
assessed every four metres from the lowest residential level up to 20 metres
and then every 10 metres above that.
All the ASRs as listed in Table 14.3.3 are subject to air quality impact during the operation phase of the underpass road. Construction of the underpass road forms part of the WKCD Project. The underpass road is scheduled to be constructed between 2013 and 2017. The planned ASRs representing facilities/buildings within the WKCD site that will be completed at the early stage of the Project will be subject to air quality impact due to construction of the facilities/buildings at a later stage. Hence, the years in which the planned ASRs will be subject to the construction phase air quality impacts are detailed in Table 14.3.3 and shown in Figures 3.1a and 3.1b. Shaded cells are indicative of residential ASRs.
Table 14.3.3: Representative ASRs
Identified for the Assessment
No. |
ASR |
Description |
Horizontal
distance from WKCD site boundary (m) |
Height (mPD) |
Height above ground (m) |
No. of storeys |
Year
subject to construction phase impact |
Notes |
1 |
SRT-1 |
(Existing ASR) |
404 |
24 |
19 |
65 |
2013 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
2 |
SRT-2 |
28 |
23 |
8m above podium |
||||
3 |
SRT-3 |
32 |
27 |
12m above podium |
||||
4 |
SRT-4 |
36 |
31 |
16m above podium |
||||
5 |
SRT-5 |
40 |
35 |
20m above podium |
||||
6 |
SRT-6 |
50 |
45 |
30 m above podium |
||||
7 |
SRT-7 |
60 |
55 |
40 m above podium |
||||
8 |
SRT-8 |
70 |
65 |
50 m above podium |
||||
9 |
SRT-9 |
80 |
75 |
60 m above podium |
||||
10 |
SRT-10 |
90 |
85 |
70 m above podium |
||||
11 |
SRT-11 |
100 |
95 |
80 m above podium |
||||
12 |
SRT-12 |
110 |
105 |
90 m above podium |
||||
13 |
SRT-13 |
120 |
115 |
100 m above podium |
||||
14 |
SRT-14 |
130 |
125 |
110 m above podium |
||||
15 |
SRT-15 |
140 |
135 |
120 m above podium |
||||
16 |
SRT-16 |
150 |
145 |
130 m above podium |
||||
17 |
SRT-17 |
160 |
155 |
140 m above podium |
||||
18 |
SRT-18 |
170 |
165 |
150 m above podium |
||||
19 |
SRT-19 |
180 |
175 |
160 m above podium |
||||
20 |
SRT-20 |
190 |
185 |
170 m above podium |
||||
21 |
SRT-21 |
200 |
195 |
180 m above podium |
||||
22 |
SRT-22 |
210 |
205 |
190 m above podium |
||||
23 |
SRT-23 |
220 |
215 |
200 m above podium |
||||
24 |
SRT-24 |
230 |
225 |
210 m above podium |
||||
25 |
SRT-25 |
240 |
235 |
220 m above podium |
||||
26 |
SRT-26 |
250 |
245 |
230 m above podium |
||||
27 |
SRT-27 |
260 |
255 |
240 m above podium |
||||
28 |
CLS-1 |
The Cullinan – Lunar Sky (Existing ASR) |
194 |
59.8 |
54.8 |
33 |
2013 – 2017 |
lowest possible fresh air intake (1st floor above podium) |
29 |
CLS-2 |
62.6 |
57.6 |
2nd lowest possible fresh air intake (2nd floor above podium) |
||||
30 |
CLS-3 |
127.0 |
122 |
24th floor inlet |
||||
31 |
CLS-4 |
129.8 |
124.8 |
25th floor inlet |
||||
32 |
CLS-5 |
163.4 |
158.4 |
37th floor inlet |
||||
33 |
CLS-6 |
166.2 |
161.2 |
38th floor inlet |
||||
34 |
WF3-1 |
The Waterfront – Tower 3 (Existing ASR) |
158 |
36.2 |
31.2 |
|
2013 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
35 |
WF3-2 |
40.2 |
35.2 |
8m above podium |
||||
36 |
WF3-3 |
44.2 |
39.2 |
12m above podium |
||||
37 |
WF3-4 |
48.2 |
43.2 |
16m above podium |
||||
38 |
WF3-5 |
58.2 |
53.2 |
20m above podium |
||||
39 |
WF3-6 |
68.2 |
63.2 |
30 m above podium |
||||
40 |
WF3-7 |
78.2 |
73.2 |
40 m above podium |
||||
41 |
WF3-8 |
88.2 |
83.2 |
50 m above podium |
||||
42 |
WF3-9 |
98.2 |
93.2 |
60 m above podium |
||||
43 |
WF3-10 |
108.2 |
103.2 |
70 m above podium |
||||
44 |
WF3-11 |
118.2 |
113.2 |
80 m above podium |
||||
45 |
WF3-12 |
128.2 |
123.2 |
90 m above podium |
||||
46 |
WF3-13 |
138.2 |
133.2 |
100 m above podium |
||||
47 |
WF6-1 |
The Waterfront – Tower 6 (Existing ASR) |
309 |
36.1 |
31.1 |
|
2013 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
48 |
WF6-2 |
40.1 |
35.1 |
8m above podium |
||||
49 |
WF6-3 |
44.1 |
39.1 |
12m above podium |
||||
50 |
WF6-4 |
48.1 |
43.1 |
16m above podium |
||||
51 |
WF6-5 |
58.1 |
53.1 |
20m above podium |
||||
52 |
WF6-6 |
68.1 |
63.1 |
30 m above podium |
||||
53 |
WF6-7 |
78.1 |
73.1 |
40 m above podium |
||||
54 |
WF6-8 |
88.1 |
83.1 |
50 m above podium |
||||
55 |
WF6-9 |
98.1 |
93.1 |
60 m above podium |
||||
56 |
WF6-10 |
108.1 |
103.1 |
70 m above podium |
||||
57 |
WF6-11 |
118.1 |
113.1 |
80 m above podium |
||||
58 |
WF6-12 |
128.1 |
123.1 |
90 m above podium |
||||
59 |
WF6-13 |
138.1 |
133.1 |
100 m above podium |
||||
60 |
ICC-1 |
International Commerce Centre(i) (Existing ASR) |
142 |
61.3 |
56.3 |
>100 |
2013 – 2017 |
5th floor inlet |
61 |
ICC-2 |
64.1 |
59.1 |
6th floor inlet |
||||
62 |
ICC-3 |
66.9 |
61.9 |
7th floor inlet |
||||
63 |
ICC-4 |
69.7 |
64.7 |
8th floor inlet |
||||
64 |
ICC-5 |
72.5 |
67.5 |
9th floor inlet |
||||
65 |
ICC-6 |
75.3 |
70.3 |
10th floor inlet |
||||
66 |
ICC-7 |
145.3 |
140.3 |
35th floor inlet |
||||
67 |
ICC-8 |
148.1 |
143.1 |
36th floor inlet |
||||
68 |
ICC-9 |
150.9 |
145.9 |
37th floor inlet |
||||
69 |
ICC-10 |
153.7 |
148.7 |
38th floor inlet |
||||
70 |
ICC-11 |
156.5 |
151.5 |
39th floor inlet |
||||
71 |
ICC-12 |
159.3 |
154.3 |
40th floor inlet |
||||
72 |
ICC-13 |
220.9 |
215.9 |
62nd floor inlet |
||||
73 |
ICC-14 |
223.7 |
218.7 |
63rd floor inlet |
||||
74 |
ICC-15 |
226.5 |
221.5 |
64th floor inlet |
||||
75 |
ICC-16 |
229.3 |
224.3 |
65th floor inlet |
||||
76 |
ICC-17 |
285.3 |
280.3 |
85th floor inlet |
||||
77 |
ICC-18 |
288.1 |
283.1 |
86th floor inlet |
||||
78 |
ICC-19 |
290.9 |
285.9 |
87th floor inlet |
||||
79 |
ICC-20 |
293.7 |
288.7 |
88th floor inlet |
||||
80 |
ICC-21 |
302.1 |
297.1 |
91st floor inlet |
||||
81 |
ICC-22 |
335.7 |
330.7 |
103rd floor inlet |
||||
82 |
HT2-1 |
The HarbourSide – Tower 2 (Existing ASR) |
47 |
30.8 |
25.8 |
63 |
2013 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
83 |
HT2-2 |
34.8 |
29.8 |
8m above podium |
||||
84 |
HT2-3 |
38.8 |
33.8 |
12m above podium |
||||
85 |
HT2-4 |
42.8 |
37.8 |
16m above podium |
||||
86 |
HT2-5 |
46.8 |
41.8 |
20m above podium |
||||
87 |
HT2-6 |
56.8 |
51.8 |
30 m above podium |
||||
88 |
HT2-7 |
66.8 |
61.8 |
40 m above podium |
||||
89 |
HT2-8 |
76.8 |
71.8 |
50 m above podium |
||||
90 |
HT2-9 |
86.8 |
81.8 |
60 m above podium |
||||
91 |
HT2-10 |
96.8 |
91.8 |
70 m above podium |
||||
92 |
HT2-11 |
106.8 |
101.8 |
80 m above podium |
||||
93 |
HT2-12 |
116.8 |
111.8 |
90 m above podium |
||||
94 |
HT2-13 |
126.8 |
121.8 |
100 m above podium |
||||
95 |
HT2-14 |
136.8 |
131.8 |
110 m above podium |
||||
96 |
HT2-15 |
146.8 |
141.8 |
120 m above podium |
||||
97 |
HT2-16 |
156.8 |
151.8 |
130 m above podium |
||||
98 |
HT2-17 |
166.8 |
161.8 |
140 m above podium |
||||
99 |
HT2-18 |
176.8 |
171.8 |
150 m above podium |
||||
100 |
HT2-19 |
186.8 |
181.8 |
160 m above podium |
||||
101 |
HT2-20 |
196.8 |
191.8 |
170 m above podium |
||||
102 |
HT2-21 |
206.8 |
201.8 |
180 m above podium |
||||
103 |
HT2-22 |
216.8 |
211.8 |
190 m above podium |
||||
104 |
HT2-23 |
226.8 |
221.8 |
200 m above podium |
||||
105 |
HT2-24 |
236.8 |
231.8 |
210 m above podium |
||||
106 |
HT2-25 |
246.8 |
241.8 |
220 m above podium |
||||
107 |
HT2-26 |
256.8 |
251.8 |
230 m above podium |
||||
108 |
HT2-27 |
266.8 |
261.8 |
240 m above podium |
||||
109 |
WKTA1-1 |
Topside Developments at West Kowloon Terminus Site
A(ii) (iii) |
31 |
28.0 |
23 |
15 |
2015 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
110 |
WKTA1-2 |
32.0 |
27 |
8m above podium |
||||
111 |
WKTA1-3 |
36.0 |
31 |
12m above podium |
||||
112 |
WKTA1-4 |
40.0 |
35 |
16m above podium |
||||
113 |
WKTA1-5 |
44.0 |
39 |
20m above podium |
||||
114 |
WKTA1-6 |
54.0 |
49 |
30 m above podium |
||||
115 |
WKTA1-7 |
64.0 |
59 |
40 m above podium |
||||
116 |
WKTA1-8 |
74.0 |
69 |
50 m above podium |
||||
117 |
WKTA1-9 |
84.0 |
79 |
60 m above podium |
||||
118 |
WKTA2-1 |
Topside Developments at West Kowloon Terminus Site
A(ii) (iii) |
198 |
28.0 |
23 |
21 |
2015 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
119 |
WKTA2-2 |
32.0 |
27 |
8m above podium |
||||
120 |
WKTA2-3 |
36.0 |
31 |
12m above podium |
||||
121 |
WKTA2-4 |
40.0 |
35 |
16m above podium |
||||
122 |
WKTA2-5 |
44.0 |
39 |
20m above podium |
||||
123 |
WKTA2-6 |
54.0 |
49 |
30 m above podium |
||||
124 |
WKTA2-7 |
64.0 |
59 |
40 m above podium |
||||
125 |
WKTA2-8 |
74.0 |
69 |
50 m above podium |
||||
126 |
WKTA2-9 |
84.0 |
79 |
60 m above podium |
||||
127 |
WKTA2-10 |
94.0 |
89 |
70 m above podium |
||||
128 |
WKTA2-11 |
104.0 |
99 |
80 m above podium |
||||
129 |
WKTA3-1 |
Topside Developments at West Kowloon Terminus Site
A(ii) (iii) |
404 |
28.0 |
23 |
15 |
2015 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
130 |
WKTA3-2 |
32.0 |
27 |
8m above podium |
||||
131 |
WKTA3-3 |
36.0 |
31 |
12m above podium |
||||
132 |
WKTA3-4 |
40.0 |
35 |
16m above podium |
||||
133 |
WKTA3-5 |
44.0 |
39 |
20m above podium |
||||
134 |
WKTA3-6 |
54.0 |
49 |
30 m above podium |
||||
135 |
WKTA3-7 |
64.0 |
59 |
40 m above podium |
||||
136 |
WKTA3-8 |
74.0 |
69 |
50 m above podium |
||||
137 |
WKTA3-9 |
84.0 |
79 |
60 m above podium |
||||
138 |
WKTA4-1 |
Topside Developments at West Kowloon Terminus Site
A(ii) (iii) |
182 |
28.0 |
23 |
25 |
2015 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
139 |
WKTA4-2 |
32.0 |
27 |
8m above podium |
||||
140 |
WKTA4-3 |
36.0 |
31 |
12m above podium |
||||
141 |
WKTA4-4 |
40.0 |
35 |
16m above podium |
||||
142 |
WKTA4-5 |
44.0 |
39 |
20m above podium |
||||
143 |
WKTA4-6 |
54.0 |
49 |
30 m above podium |
||||
144 |
WKTA4-7 |
64.0 |
59 |
40 m above podium |
||||
145 |
WKTA4-8 |
74.0 |
69 |
50 m above podium |
||||
146 |
WKTA4-9 |
84.0 |
79 |
60 m above podium |
||||
147 |
WKTA4-10 |
94.0 |
89 |
70 m above podium |
||||
148 |
WKTA4-11 |
104.0 |
99 |
80 m above podium |
||||
149 |
WKTA4-12 |
114.0 |
109 |
90 m above podium |
||||
150 |
WKTA4-13 |
124.0 |
119 |
100 m above podium |
||||
151 |
AMT-1 |
The Arch – (Existing ASR) |
95 |
42.0 |
37 |
52 |
2013 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
152 |
AMT-2 |
46.0 |
41 |
8m above podium |
||||
153 |
AMT-3 |
50.0 |
45 |
12m above podium |
||||
154 |
AMT-4 |
54.0 |
49 |
16m above podium |
||||
155 |
AMT-5 |
58.0 |
53 |
20m above podium |
||||
156 |
AMT-6 |
68.0 |
63 |
30 m above podium |
||||
157 |
AMT-7 |
78.0 |
73 |
40 m above podium |
||||
158 |
AMT-8 |
88.0 |
83 |
50 m above podium |
||||
159 |
AMT-9 |
98.0 |
93 |
60 m above podium |
||||
160 |
AMT-10 |
108.0 |
103 |
70 m above podium |
||||
161 |
AMT-11 |
118.0 |
113 |
80 m above podium |
||||
162 |
AMT-12 |
128.0 |
123 |
90 m above podium |
||||
163 |
AMT-13 |
138.0 |
133 |
100 m above podium |
||||
164 |
AMT-14 |
148.0 |
143 |
110 m above podium |
||||
165 |
AMT-15 |
158.0 |
153 |
120 m above podium |
||||
166 |
AMT-16 |
168.0 |
163 |
130 m above podium |
||||
167 |
AMT-17 |
178.0 |
173 |
140 m above podium |
||||
168 |
AMT-18 |
188.0 |
183 |
150 m above podium |
||||
169 |
AMT-19 |
198.0 |
193 |
160 m above podium |
||||
170 |
AMT-20 |
208.0 |
203 |
170 m above podium |
||||
171 |
AMT-21 |
218.0 |
213 |
180 m above podium |
||||
172 |
AMT-22 |
228.0 |
223 |
190 m above podium |
||||
173 |
PB1-1 |
Residential Developments at Austin Station(iii) |
326 |
15.8 |
10.8 |
23 |
2015 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
174 |
PB1-2 |
30.1 |
25.1 |
8m above podium |
||||
175 |
PB1-3 |
34.1 |
29.1 |
12m above podium |
||||
176 |
PB1-4 |
38.1 |
33.1 |
16m above podium |
||||
177 |
PB1-5 |
42.1 |
37.1 |
20m above podium |
||||
178 |
PB1-6 |
46.1 |
41.1 |
30 m above podium |
||||
179 |
PB1-7 |
56.1 |
51.1 |
40 m above podium |
||||
180 |
PB1-8 |
66.1 |
61.1 |
50 m above podium |
||||
181 |
PB1-9 |
76.1 |
71.1 |
60 m above podium |
||||
182 |
PB1-10 |
86.1 |
81.1 |
70 m above podium |
||||
183 |
PB1-11 |
96.1 |
91.1 |
80 m above podium |
||||
184 |
PB2-1 |
Residential Developments at Austin Station(iii) |
222 |
15.8 |
10.8 |
21 |
2015 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
185 |
PB2-2 |
30.1 |
25.1 |
8m above podium |
||||
186 |
PB2-3 |
34.1 |
29.1 |
12m above podium |
||||
187 |
PB2-4 |
38.1 |
33.1 |
16m above podium |
||||
188 |
PB2-5 |
42.1 |
37.1 |
20m above podium |
||||
189 |
PB2-6 |
46.1 |
41.1 |
30 m above podium |
||||
190 |
PB2-7 |
56.1 |
51.1 |
40 m above podium |
||||
191 |
PB2-8 |
66.1 |
61.1 |
50 m above podium |
||||
192 |
PB2-9 |
76.1 |
71.1 |
60 m above podium |
||||
193 |
PB2-10 |
86.1 |
81.1 |
70 m above podium |
||||
194 |
PB3-1 |
Residential Developments at Austin Station(iii) |
182 |
30.6 |
25.6 |
26 |
2015 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
195 |
PB3-2 |
34.6 |
29.6 |
8m above podium |
||||
196 |
PB3-3 |
38.6 |
33.6 |
12m above podium |
||||
197 |
PB3-4 |
42.6 |
37.6 |
16m above podium |
||||
198 |
PB3-5 |
46.6 |
41.6 |
20m above podium |
||||
199 |
PB3-6 |
56.6 |
51.6 |
30 m above podium |
||||
200 |
PB3-7 |
66.6 |
61.6 |
40 m above podium |
||||
201 |
PB3-8 |
76.6 |
71.6 |
50 m above podium |
||||
202 |
PB3-9 |
86.6 |
81.6 |
60 m above podium |
||||
203 |
PB3-10 |
96.6 |
91.6 |
70 m above podium |
||||
204 |
PB4-1 |
Residential Developments at Austin Station(iii) |
39 |
49.5 |
44.5 |
20 |
2015 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
205 |
PB4-2 |
53.5 |
48.5 |
8m above podium |
||||
206 |
PB4-3 |
57.5 |
52.5 |
12m above podium |
||||
207 |
PB4-4 |
61.5 |
56.5 |
16m above podium |
||||
208 |
PB4-5 |
65.5 |
60.5 |
20m above podium |
||||
209 |
PB4-6 |
75.5 |
70.5 |
30 m above podium |
||||
210 |
PB4-7 |
85.5 |
80.5 |
40 m above podium |
||||
211 |
PB4-8 |
95.5 |
90.5 |
50 m above podium |
||||
212 |
PB4-9 |
105.5 |
100.5 |
60 m above podium |
||||
213 |
PB4-10 |
115.5 |
110.5 |
70 m above podium |
||||
214 |
WOB-1 |
Wai On Building – Block A (Existing ASR) |
47 |
11.8 |
6.8 |
16 |
2013 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
215 |
WOB-2 |
15.8 |
10.8 |
8m above podium |
||||
216 |
WOB-3 |
19.8 |
14.8 |
12m above podium |
||||
217 |
WOB-4 |
23.8 |
18.8 |
16m above podium |
||||
218 |
WOB-5 |
27.8 |
22.8 |
20m above podium |
||||
219 |
WOB-6 |
37.8 |
32.8 |
30 m above podium |
||||
220 |
WOB-7 |
47.8 |
42.8 |
40 m above podium |
||||
221 |
WOB-8 |
57.8 |
52.8 |
50 m above podium |
||||
222 |
VT1-1 |
The (Existing ASR) |
31 |
49.3 |
44.3 |
52 |
2013 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
223 |
VT1-2 |
53.3 |
48.3 |
8m above podium |
||||
224 |
VT1-3 |
57.3 |
52.3 |
12m above podium |
||||
225 |
VT1-4 |
61.3 |
56.3 |
16m above podium |
||||
226 |
VT1-5 |
65.3 |
60.3 |
20m above podium |
||||
227 |
VT1-6 |
75.3 |
70.3 |
30 m above podium |
||||
228 |
VT1-7 |
85.3 |
80.3 |
40 m above podium |
||||
229 |
VT1-8 |
95.3 |
90.3 |
50 m above podium |
||||
230 |
VT1-9 |
105.3 |
100.3 |
60 m above podium |
||||
231 |
VT1-10 |
115.3 |
110.3 |
70 m above podium |
||||
232 |
VT1-11 |
125.3 |
120.3 |
80 m above podium |
||||
233 |
VT1-12 |
135.3 |
130.3 |
90 m above podium |
||||
234 |
VT1-13 |
145.3 |
140.3 |
100 m above podium |
||||
235 |
VT1-14 |
155.3 |
150.3 |
110 m above podium |
||||
236 |
VT1-15 |
165.3 |
160.3 |
120 m above podium |
||||
237 |
VT1-16 |
175.3 |
170.3 |
130 m above podium |
||||
238 |
VT1-17 |
185.3 |
180.3 |
140 m above podium |
||||
239 |
VT1-18 |
195.3 |
190.3 |
150 m above podium |
||||
240 |
VT1-19 |
205.3 |
200.3 |
160 m above podium |
||||
241 |
VT1-20 |
215.3 |
210.3 |
170 m above podium |
||||
242 |
VT1-21 |
225.3 |
220.3 |
180 m above podium |
||||
243 |
VT1-22 |
235.3 |
230.3 |
190 m above podium |
||||
244 |
VT1-23 |
13.0 |
8 |
Fresh Air Intake |
||||
245 |
LCS-1 |
(Existing ASR) |
31 |
11.2 |
6.2 |
7 |
2013 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
246 |
LCS-2 |
15.2 |
10.2 |
8m above podium |
||||
247 |
CHC1-1 |
(Existing ASR) |
15 |
23.1 |
18.1 |
11 |
2013 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
248 |
CHC1-2 |
27.1 |
22.1 |
8m above podium |
||||
249 |
CHC1-3 |
31.1 |
26.1 |
12m above podium |
||||
250 |
CHC1-4 |
35.1 |
30.1 |
16m above podium |
||||
251 |
CHC1-5 |
39.1 |
34.1 |
20m above podium |
||||
252 |
CHC1-6 |
49.1 |
44.1 |
30 m above podium |
||||
253 |
CHC2-1 |
(Existing ASR) |
7 |
23.1 |
18.1 |
11 |
2013 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
254 |
CHC2-2 |
27.1 |
22.1 |
8m above podium |
||||
255 |
CHC2-3 |
31.1 |
26.1 |
12m above podium |
||||
256 |
CHC2-4 |
35.1 |
30.1 |
16m above podium |
||||
257 |
CHC2-5 |
39.1 |
34.1 |
20m above podium |
||||
258 |
CHC2-6 |
49.1 |
44.1 |
30 m above podium |
||||
259 |
RPH-1 |
The Royal Pacific Hotel(i) (Existing ASR) |
119 |
23.1 |
18.1 |
15 |
2013 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
260 |
RPH-2 |
27.1 |
22.1 |
8m above podium |
||||
261 |
RPH-3 |
31.1 |
26.1 |
12m above podium |
||||
262 |
RPH-4 |
35.1 |
30.1 |
16m above podium |
||||
263 |
RPH-5 |
39.1 |
34.1 |
20m above podium |
||||
264 |
RPH-6 |
49.1 |
44.1 |
30 m above podium |
||||
265 |
PCK-1 |
Pacific Club (Existing ASR) |
317 |
24.0 |
19 |
4 |
2013 – 2017 |
4m above podium |
266 |
P01a-1 |
Parcel 01 (Planned ASR from 2015 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
7 |
2015 – 2017 |
See Note (vi) |
267 |
P01a-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
268 |
P01a-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
269 |
P01a-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
270 |
P01a-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
271 |
P01a-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
272 |
P01a-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
273 |
P01b-1 |
Parcel 01 (Planned ASR from 2015 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
7 |
2015 – 2017 |
See Note (vi) |
274 |
P01b-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
275 |
P01b-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
276 |
P01b-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
277 |
P01b-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
278 |
P01b-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
279 |
P01b-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
280 |
P01c-1 |
Parcel 01 (Planned ASR from 2015 onwards) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
7 |
2015 – 2017 |
See Note (vi) |
281 |
P01c-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
282 |
P01c-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
283 |
P01c-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
284 |
P01c-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
285 |
P01c-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
286 |
P01c-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
287 |
P01d-1 |
Parcel 01 (Planned ASR from 2015 onwards) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
7 |
2015 – 2017 |
See Note (vi) |
288 |
P01d-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
289 |
P01d-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
290 |
P01d-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
291 |
P01d-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
292 |
P01d-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
293 |
P01d-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
294 |
P01e-1 |
Parcel 01 (Planned ASR from 2015 onwards) |
|
49.4 |
40.0 |
7 |
2015 – 2017 |
|
295 |
P02-1 |
Parcel 02 (Planned ASR from 2030 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
15 |
none |
|
296 |
P02-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
297 |
P02-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
298 |
P02-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
299 |
P02-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
300 |
P02-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
301 |
P02-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
302 |
P02-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
303 |
P03-1 |
Parcel 03 (Planned ASR from 2030 onwards) |
N/A |
11.2 |
4.0 |
8 |
none |
|
304 |
P03-2 |
15.2 |
8.0 |
|
||||
305 |
P03-3 |
19.2 |
12.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
306 |
P03-4 |
23.2 |
16.0 |
|
||||
307 |
P03-5 |
27.2 |
20.0 |
|
||||
308 |
P04-1 |
Parcel 04 (Planned ASR from 2030 onwards) |
N/A |
9.0 |
4.0 |
5 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
309 |
P04-2 |
13.0 |
8.0 |
|
||||
310 |
P04-3 |
17.0 |
12.0 |
|
||||
311 |
P04-4 |
21.0 |
16.0 |
|
||||
312 |
P04-5 |
25.0 |
20.0 |
|
||||
313 |
P04-6 |
35.0 |
30.0 |
|
||||
314 |
P05-1 |
Parcel 05 (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
15 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
315 |
P05-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
316 |
P05-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
317 |
P05-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
318 |
P05-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
319 |
P05-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
320 |
P05-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
321 |
P06-1 |
Parcel 06 Residential (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
14 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
322 |
P06-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
323 |
P06-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
324 |
P06-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
325 |
P06-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
326 |
P06-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
327 |
P06-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
328 |
P07-1 |
Parcel 07 Residential (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
14 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
329 |
P07-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
330 |
P07-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
331 |
P07-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
332 |
P07-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
333 |
P07-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
334 |
P07-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
335 |
P08-1 |
Parcel 08 (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
5 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
336 |
P08-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
337 |
P08-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
338 |
P08-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
339 |
P08-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
340 |
P09-1 |
Parcel 09 (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
15 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
341 |
P09-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
342 |
P09-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
343 |
P09-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
344 |
P09-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
345 |
P09-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
346 |
P09-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
347 |
P10-1 |
Parcel 10 Residential (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
15 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
348 |
P10-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
349 |
P10-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
350 |
P10-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
351 |
P10-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
352 |
P10-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
353 |
P10-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
354 |
P10-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
355 |
P11-1 |
Parcel 11 Residential (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
15 |
2017 |
|
356 |
P11-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
357 |
P11-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
358 |
P11-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
359 |
P11-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
360 |
P11-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
361 |
P11-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
362 |
P11-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
363 |
P12-1 |
Parcel 12 (Planned ASR from beyond 2020) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
15 |
None |
See Note (vi) |
364 |
P12-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
365 |
P12-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
366 |
P12-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
367 |
P12-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
368 |
P13-1 |
Parcel 13 Residential (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
15 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
369 |
P13-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
370 |
P13-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
371 |
P13-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
372 |
P13-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
373 |
P13-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
374 |
P13-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
375 |
P13-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
376 |
P14-1 |
Parcel 14 (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
12 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
377 |
P14-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
378 |
P14-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
379 |
P14-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
380 |
P14-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
381 |
P14-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
382 |
P14-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
383 |
P15-1 |
Parcel 15 (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
12 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
384 |
P15-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
385 |
P15-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
386 |
P15-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
387 |
P15-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
388 |
P15-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
389 |
P15-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
390 |
P16-1 |
Parcel 16 Retail/ Dining/ Entertainment (v) Residential (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
8 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
391 |
P16-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
392 |
P16-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
393 |
P16-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
394 |
P16-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
395 |
P16-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
396 |
P16-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
397 |
P16-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
398 |
P17-1 |
Parcel 17 Residential (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
15 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
399 |
P17-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
400 |
P17-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
401 |
P17-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
402 |
P17-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
403 |
P17-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
404 |
P17-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
405 |
P18a-1 |
Parcel 18 (iv) (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
8 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
406 |
P18a-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
407 |
P18a-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
408 |
P18a-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
409 |
P18a-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
410 |
P18a-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
411 |
P18a-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
412 |
P18b-1 |
Parcel 18 (iv) (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
8 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
413 |
P18b-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
414 |
P18b-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
415 |
P18b-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
416 |
P18b-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
417 |
P18b-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
418 |
P18b-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
419 |
P18c-1 |
Parcel 18 (iv) (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
8 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
420 |
P18c-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
421 |
P18c-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
422 |
P18c-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
423 |
P18c-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
424 |
P18c-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
425 |
P18c-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
426 |
P18d-1 |
Parcel 18 (iv) (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
8 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
427 |
P18d-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
428 |
P18d-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
429 |
P18d-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
430 |
P18d-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
431 |
P18d-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
432 |
P18d-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
433 |
P18e |
Parcel 18 (iv) (Planned ASR from 2030 onwards) |
N/A |
49.4 |
40.0 |
8 |
none |
|
434 |
P19-1 |
Parcel 19 + Retail/ Dining/ Entertainment (v) Residential (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
14 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
435 |
P19-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
436 |
P19-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
437 |
P19-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
438 |
P19-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
439 |
P19-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
440 |
P19-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
441 |
P19-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
442 |
P20-1 |
Parcel 20 + Retail/ Dining/ Entertainment (iv) (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
13 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
443 |
P20-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
444 |
P20-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
445 |
P20-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
446 |
P20-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
447 |
P20-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
448 |
P20-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
449 |
P20-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
450 |
P21-1 |
Parcel 21 + Retail/ Dining/ Entertainment (v) Residential (Planned ASR
from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
13 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
451 |
P21-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
452 |
P21-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
453 |
P21-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
454 |
P21-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
455 |
P21-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
456 |
P21-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
457 |
P22-1 |
Parcel 22 + Retail/ Dining/ Entertainment (v) Residential (Planned ASR
from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
13 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
458 |
P22-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
459 |
P22-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
460 |
P22-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
461 |
P22-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
462 |
P22-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
463 |
P22-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
464 |
P22-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
465 |
P23a-1 |
Parcel 23 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
8 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
466 |
P23a-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
467 |
P23a-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
468 |
P23a-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
469 |
P23a-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
470 |
P23a-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
471 |
P23a-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
472 |
P23b-1 |
Parcel 23 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
8 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
473 |
P23b-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
474 |
P23b-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
475 |
P23b-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
476 |
P23b-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
477 |
P23b-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
478 |
P23b-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
479 |
P23c-1 |
Parcel 23 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
8 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
480 |
P23c-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
481 |
P23c-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
482 |
P23c-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
483 |
P23c-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
484 |
P23c-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
485 |
P23c-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
486 |
P23d-1 |
Parcel 23 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
8 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
487 |
P23d-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
488 |
P23d-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
489 |
P23d-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
490 |
P23d-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
491 |
P23d-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
492 |
P23d-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
493 |
P23e |
Parcel 23 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
49.4 |
40.0 |
8 |
none |
|
494 |
P24-1 |
Parcel 24 + Retail/ Dining/ Entertainment (v) Residential (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
14 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
495 |
P24-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
496 |
P24-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
497 |
P24-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
498 |
P24-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
499 |
P24-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
500 |
P24-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
501 |
P24-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
502 |
P25-1 |
Parcel 25 (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
1 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
503 |
P25-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
504 |
P25-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
505 |
P25-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
506 |
P25-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
507 |
P26-1 |
Parcel 26 + Retail/ Dining/ Entertainment (v) Residential (Planned ASR
from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
15 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
508 |
P26-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
509 |
P26-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
510 |
P26-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
511 |
P26-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
512 |
P26-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
513 |
P26-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
514 |
P26-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
515 |
P27-1 |
Parcel 27 + Retail/ Dining/ Entertainment (v) Residential (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
15 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
516 |
P27-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
517 |
P27-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
518 |
P27-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
519 |
P27-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
520 |
P27-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
521 |
P27-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
522 |
P27-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
523 |
P28-1 |
Parcel 28 + Retail/ Dining/ Entertainment (v) Residential (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
21 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
524 |
P28-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
525 |
P28-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
526 |
P28-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
527 |
P28-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
528 |
P28-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
529 |
P28-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
530 |
P28-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
531 |
P28-9 |
69.4 |
60.0 |
|
||||
532 |
P28-10 |
79.4 |
70.0 |
|
||||
533 |
P29-1 |
Parcel 29 + Retail/ Dining/ Entertainment (v) Residential (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
23 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
534 |
P29-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
535 |
P29-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
536 |
P29-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
537 |
P29-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
538 |
P29-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
539 |
P29-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
540 |
P29-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
541 |
P29-9 |
69.4 |
60.0 |
|
||||
542 |
P29-10 |
79.4 |
70.0 |
|
||||
543 |
P30a-1 |
Parcel 30 (Planned ASR from beyond 2020) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
6 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
544 |
P30a-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
545 |
P30a-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
546 |
P30a-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
547 |
P30a-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
548 |
P30b-1 |
Parcel 30 (Planned ASR from beyond 2020) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
6 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
549 |
P30b-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
550 |
P30b-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
551 |
P30b-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
552 |
P30b-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
553 |
P30c-1 |
Parcel 30 (Planned ASR from beyond 2020) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
6 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
554 |
P30c-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
555 |
P30c-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
556 |
P30c-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
557 |
P30c-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
558 |
P30d-1 |
Parcel 30 (Planned ASR from beyond 2020) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
6 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
559 |
P30d-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
560 |
P30d-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
561 |
P30d-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
562 |
P30d-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
563 |
P30e |
Parcel 30 (Planned ASR from beyond 2020) |
|
29.4 |
20.0 |
6 |
none |
|
564 |
P31-1 |
Parcel 31 Office(iv) (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
22 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
565 |
P31-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
566 |
P31-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
567 |
P31-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
568 |
P31-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
569 |
P31-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
570 |
P31-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
571 |
P31-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
572 |
P31-9 |
69.4 |
60.0 |
|
||||
573 |
P31-10 |
79.4 |
70.0 |
|
||||
574 |
P31-11 |
89.4 |
80.0 |
|
||||
575 |
P32-1 |
Parcel 32 Residential (Planned ASR
from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
15 |
none |
|
576 |
P32-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
577 |
P32-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
Lowest residential floor |
||||
578 |
P32-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
579 |
P32-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
580 |
P32-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
581 |
P32-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
582 |
P34-1 |
Parcel 34 + Planned Performance Art Venues within WKCD (iv) (Planned ASR
from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
21 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
583 |
P34-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
584 |
P34-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
585 |
P34-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
586 |
P34-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
587 |
P34-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
588 |
P34-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
589 |
P34-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
590 |
P34-9 |
69.4 |
60.0 |
|
||||
591 |
P34-10 |
79.4 |
70.0 |
|
||||
592 |
P35a-1 |
Parcel 35 (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
7 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
593 |
P35a-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
594 |
P35a-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
595 |
P35a-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
596 |
P35a-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
597 |
P35b-1 |
Parcel 35 (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
7 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
598 |
P35b-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
599 |
P35b-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
600 |
P35b-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
601 |
P35b-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
602 |
P35c-1 |
Parcel 35 (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
7 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
603 |
P35c-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
604 |
P35c-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
605 |
P35c-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
606 |
P35c-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
607 |
P35d-1 |
Parcel 35 (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
7 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
608 |
P35d-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
609 |
P35d-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
610 |
P35d-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
611 |
P35d-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
612 |
P35e-1 |
Parcel 35 (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
|
29.4 |
20.0 |
7 |
2017 |
|
613 |
P36-1 |
Parcel 36 (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
11.4 |
4.0 |
15 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
614 |
P36-2 |
15.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
615 |
P36-3 |
19.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
616 |
P36-4 |
23.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
617 |
P36-5 |
27.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
618 |
P36-6 |
37.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
619 |
P36-7 |
47.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
620 |
P36-8 |
57.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
621 |
P36-9 |
67.4 |
60.0 |
|
||||
622 |
P36-10 |
77.4 |
70.0 |
|
||||
623 |
P37-1 |
Parcel 37 (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
11.4 |
4.0 |
15 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
624 |
P37-2 |
15.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
625 |
P37-3 |
19.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
626 |
P37-4 |
23.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
627 |
P37-5 |
27.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
628 |
P37-6 |
37.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
629 |
P37-7 |
47.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
630 |
P37-8 |
57.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
631 |
P37-9 |
67.4 |
60.0 |
|
||||
632 |
P37-10 |
77.4 |
70.0 |
|
||||
633 |
P38-1 |
Parcel 38 Planned Performance Art Venues within WKCD (iv) (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
21 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
634 |
P38-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
635 |
P38-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
636 |
P38-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
637 |
P38-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
638 |
P38-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
639 |
P38-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
640 |
P38-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
641 |
P38-9 |
69.4 |
60.0 |
|
||||
642 |
P38-10 |
79.4 |
70.0 |
|
||||
643 |
P39-1 |
Parcel 39 Planned Performance Art Venues within WKCD (iv) (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
11 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
644 |
P39-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
645 |
P39-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
646 |
P39-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
647 |
P39-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
648 |
P39-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
649 |
P39-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
650 |
P39-8 |
59.4 |
50.0 |
|
||||
651 |
P39-9 |
69.4 |
60.0 |
|
||||
652 |
P39-10 |
79.4 |
70.0 |
|
||||
653 |
P40a-1 |
Parcel 40 (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
6 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
654 |
P40a-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
655 |
P40a-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
656 |
P40a-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
657 |
P40a-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
658 |
P40a-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
659 |
P40a-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
660 |
P40b-1 |
Parcel 40 (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
6 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
661 |
P40b-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
662 |
P40b-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
663 |
P40b-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
664 |
P40b-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
665 |
P40b-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
666 |
P40b-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
667 |
P40c-1 |
Parcel 40 (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
6 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
668 |
P40c-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
669 |
P40c-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
670 |
P40c-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
671 |
P40c-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
672 |
P40c-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
673 |
P40c-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
674 |
P40d-1 |
Parcel 40 (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
|
13.4 |
4.0 |
6 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
675 |
P40d-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
676 |
P40d-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
677 |
P40d-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
678 |
P40d-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
679 |
P40d-6 |
39.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
680 |
P40d-7 |
49.4 |
40.0 |
|
||||
681 |
P40e |
Parcel 40 (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
|
49.4 |
40.0 |
6 |
none |
|
682 |
P41-1 |
Parcel 41 (Planned ASR from 2030 onwards) |
N/A |
13.4 |
4.0 |
1 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
683 |
P41-2 |
17.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
684 |
P41-3 |
21.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
685 |
P41-4 |
25.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
686 |
P41-5 |
29.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
687 |
P43a-1 |
Parcel 43 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
N/A |
16.5 |
4.0 |
13 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
688 |
P43a-2 |
20.5 |
8.0 |
|
||||
689 |
P43a-3 |
24.5 |
12.0 |
|
||||
690 |
P43a-4 |
28.5 |
16.0 |
|
||||
691 |
P43b-1 |
Parcel 43 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
16.5 |
4.0 |
13 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
692 |
P43b-2 |
20.5 |
8.0 |
|
||||
693 |
P43b-3 |
24.5 |
12.0 |
|
||||
694 |
P43b-4 |
28.5 |
16.0 |
|
||||
695 |
P43b-5 |
32.5 |
20.0 |
|
||||
696 |
P43c-1 |
Parcel 43 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
16.5 |
4.0 |
13 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
697 |
P43c-2 |
20.5 |
8.0 |
|
||||
698 |
P43c-3 |
24.5 |
12.0 |
|
||||
699 |
P43c-4 |
28.5 |
16.0 |
|
||||
700 |
P43c-5 |
32.5 |
20.0 |
|
||||
701 |
P43d-1 |
Parcel 43 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
16.5 |
4.0 |
13 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
702 |
P43d-2 |
20.5 |
8.0 |
|
||||
703 |
P43d-3 |
24.5 |
12.0 |
|
||||
704 |
P43d-4 |
28.5 |
16.0 |
|
||||
705 |
P43d-5 |
32.5 |
20.0 |
|
||||
706 |
P43d-6 |
42.5 |
30.0 |
|
||||
707 |
P43d-7 |
52.5 |
40.0 |
|
||||
708 |
P43e-1 |
Parcel 43 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
16.5 |
4.0 |
13 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
709 |
P43e-2 |
20.5 |
8.0 |
|
||||
710 |
P43e-3 |
24.5 |
12.0 |
|
||||
711 |
P43e-4 |
28.5 |
16.0 |
|
||||
712 |
P43e-5 |
32.5 |
20.0 |
|
||||
713 |
P43e-6 |
42.5 |
30.0 |
|
||||
714 |
P43e-7 |
52.5 |
40.0 |
|
||||
715 |
P43e-8 |
62.5 |
50.0 |
|
||||
716 |
P43f-1 |
Parcel 43 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
16.5 |
4.0 |
13 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
717 |
P43f-2 |
20.5 |
8.0 |
|
||||
718 |
P43f-3 |
24.5 |
12.0 |
|
||||
719 |
P43f-4 |
28.5 |
16.0 |
|
||||
720 |
P43f-5 |
32.5 |
20.0 |
|
||||
721 |
P43f-6 |
42.5 |
30.0 |
|
||||
722 |
P43f-7 |
52.5 |
40.0 |
|
||||
723 |
P43f-8 |
62.5 |
50.0 |
|
||||
724 |
P43g-1 |
Parcel 43 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
16.5 |
4.0 |
13 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
725 |
P43g-2 |
20.5 |
8.0 |
|
||||
726 |
P43g-3 |
24.5 |
12.0 |
|
||||
727 |
P43g-4 |
28.5 |
16.0 |
|
||||
728 |
P43g-5 |
32.5 |
20.0 |
|
||||
729 |
P43g-6 |
42.5 |
30.0 |
|
||||
730 |
P43g-7 |
52.5 |
40.0 |
|
||||
731 |
P43h-1 |
Parcel 43 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
16.5 |
4.0 |
13 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
732 |
P43h-2 |
20.5 |
8.0 |
|
||||
733 |
P43h-3 |
24.5 |
12.0 |
|
||||
734 |
P43h-4 |
28.5 |
16.0 |
|
||||
735 |
P43h-5 |
32.5 |
20.0 |
|
||||
736 |
P43h-6 |
42.5 |
30.0 |
|
||||
737 |
P43h-7 |
52.5 |
40.0 |
|
||||
738 |
P43i-1 |
Parcel 43 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
16.5 |
4.0 |
13 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
739 |
P43i-2 |
20.5 |
8.0 |
|
||||
740 |
P43i-3 |
24.5 |
12.0 |
|
||||
741 |
P43i-4 |
28.5 |
16.0 |
|
||||
742 |
P43i-5 |
32.5 |
20.0 |
|
||||
743 |
P43i-6 |
42.5 |
30.0 |
|
||||
744 |
P43j-1 |
Parcel 43 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
16.5 |
4.0 |
13 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
745 |
P43j-2 |
20.5 |
8.0 |
|
||||
746 |
P43j-3 |
24.5 |
12.0 |
|
||||
747 |
P43j-4 |
28.5 |
16.0 |
|
||||
748 |
P43j-5 |
32.5 |
20.0 |
|
||||
749 |
P43k-1 |
Parcel 43 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
16.5 |
4.0 |
13 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
750 |
P43k-2 |
20.5 |
8.0 |
|
||||
751 |
P43k-3 |
24.5 |
12.0 |
|
||||
752 |
P43k-4 |
28.5 |
16.0 |
|
||||
753 |
P46a-1 |
Parcel 46 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
N/A |
16.4 |
4.0 |
5 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
754 |
P46a-2 |
20.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
755 |
P46a-3 |
24.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
755 |
P46a-4 |
28.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
756 |
P46a-5 |
32.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
757 |
P46a-6 |
42.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
758 |
P46b-1 |
Parcel 46 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
16.4 |
4.0 |
5 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
759 |
P46b-2 |
20.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
760 |
P46b-3 |
24.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
761 |
P46b-4 |
28.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
762 |
P46b-5 |
32.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
763 |
P46b-6 |
42.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
764 |
P46c-1 |
Parcel 46 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
16.4 |
4.0 |
5 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
765 |
P46c-2 |
20.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
766 |
P46c-3 |
24.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
767 |
P46c-4 |
28.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
768 |
P46c-5 |
32.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
769 |
P46c-6 |
42.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
770 |
P46d-1 |
Parcel 46 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
16.4 |
4.0 |
5 |
none |
See Note (vi) |
771 |
P46d-2 |
20.4 |
8.0 |
|
||||
772 |
P46d-3 |
24.4 |
12.0 |
|
||||
773 |
P46d-4 |
28.4 |
16.0 |
|
||||
774 |
P46d-5 |
32.4 |
20.0 |
|
||||
775 |
P46d-6 |
42.4 |
30.0 |
|
||||
776 |
P46e-1 |
Parcel 46 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
|
42.4 |
30.0 |
5 |
none |
|
777 |
P50-1 |
Parcel 50 (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
N/A |
9.0 |
4.0 |
NA |
none |
See Note (vi) |
778 |
P50-2 |
13.0 |
8.0 |
|
||||
779 |
P50-3 |
17.0 |
12.0 |
|
||||
780 |
P50-4 |
21.0 |
16.0 |
|
||||
781 |
P50-5 |
25.0 |
20.0 |
|
||||
782 |
P51-1 |
Parcel 51 (Planned ASR from 2016 onwards) |
N/A |
9.0 |
4.0 |
NA |
2016 – 2017 |
See Note (vi) |
783 |
P51-2 |
13.0 |
8.0 |
|
||||
784 |
P51-3 |
17.0 |
12.0 |
|
||||
785 |
P51-4 |
21.0 |
16.0 |
|
||||
786 |
P51-5 |
25.0 |
20.0 |
|
||||
787 |
P52-1 |
Parcel 52 (Planned ASR from 2016 onwards) |
N/A |
9.0 |
4.0 |
2 |
2016 – 2017 |
See Note (vi) |
788 |
P52-2 |
13.0 |
8.0 |
|
||||
789 |
P52-3 |
17.0 |
12.0 |
|
||||
790 |
P52-4 |
21.0 |
16.0 |
|
||||
791 |
P52-5 |
25.0 |
20.0 |
|
||||
792 |
P53-1 |
Parcel 53 (Planned ASR from 2014 onwards) |
N/A |
9.0 |
4.0 |
2 |
2014 – 2017 |
See Note (vi) |
793 |
P53-2 |
13.0 |
8.0 |
|
||||
794 |
P53-3 |
17.0 |
12.0 |
|
||||
795 |
P53-4 |
21.0 |
16.0 |
|
||||
796 |
P53-5 |
25.0 |
20.0 |
|
||||
797 |
P54-1 |
Parcel 54 (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
9.0 |
4.0 |
1 |
2017 |
See Note (vi) |
798 |
P54-2 |
13.0 |
8.0 |
|
||||
799 |
P54-3 |
17.0 |
12.0 |
|
||||
800 |
P54-4 |
21.0 |
16.0 |
|
||||
801 |
P54-5 |
25.0 |
20.0 |
|
||||
802 |
OP |
Open space (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
N/A |
6.5 |
1.5 |
0 |
2017 |
|
Notes (i) Estimated locations of the fresh air takes of these developments are
taken as the ASRs.
(ii) The locations and no. of storeys of the planned ASRs representing the topside development at West Kowloon Terminus
(WKT) Site A are based on the approved EIA for Hong Kong Section of the
(iii) According
to the approved EIA for Road
Works at
West Kowloon, these planned ASRs
will be occupied upon completion of construction
of the Road Works at
(iv) The planned ASRs represent the indicative fresh air
intake locations of these planned developments.
(v) Selected assessment height
is the indicative location of fresh air intake at podium level.
(vi) The planned ASRs at 4m above ground level
are assessment points for reference only, but are not fresh air intake or
openable window locations.
14.3.3 Identification of Pollution Sources
14.3.3.1 Background Air Quality
The underpass road is located on the
With reference to EPD’s Air Quality Annual Report, the EPD’s general air quality monitoring stations in urban areas that can be considered as an indication of the background concentration include Central/Western, Kwun Tong, Sham Shui Po, Tsuen Wan and Kwai Chung. The average TSP concentration of all these five monitoring stations is detailed in Table.14.3.4.
Table.14.3.4 Average
Background TSP Air Pollutant Concentrations (Year 2007-2011)
Urban Stations |
Annual Average TSP Concentration (μg/m3) |
TSP Background Concentration (μg/m3) |
||||
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
||
Tsuen Wan |
79 |
67 |
63 |
63 |
69 |
68.2 |
Kwai Chung |
85 |
79 |
70 |
71 |
71 |
75.2 |
Sham Shui Po |
79 |
81 |
77 |
76 |
79 |
78.4 |
Kwun Tong |
82 |
72 |
70 |
67 |
74 |
73.0 |
Central/Western |
77 |
78 |
73 |
76 |
78 |
76.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
74.2 |
Note: Monitoring results that exceeded AQO are
shown in bold characters.
Dust monitoring has been undertaken in the vicinity of the proposed West Kowloon Terminus (WKT) from March 2010 to December 2012 inclusive as part of the environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) works for XRL project. The air monitoring stations considered to be most relevant to WKCD area are AM16 and AM17, as both stations are in close proximity to the WKCD site (see Figure 3.2). The annual average TSP concentration during that construction period of WKT has been calculated, as shown in Table 14.3.5 (see Appendix 3.27 for details).
Table 14.3.5: Air Quality Monitoring Results for Hong Kong Section of Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link relevant to WKCD (March 2010 – December 2012)
Monitoring Station |
Location |
Annual Average TSP Concentration (μg/m3) |
3-year Average Concentration (μg/m3) |
||
|
2010(1) |
2011 |
2012 |
||
AM16 |
Tower
3, The Waterfront |
74.2 |
73.4 |
54.3 |
67.1 |
AM17 |
The
Victoria Towers |
74.7 |
79.3 |
55.5 |
69.7 |
|
|
|
|
Average
|
68.4 |
Note: (1) Monitoring
results from March 2010 to December 2010.
As the air quality monitoring stations AM16
and AM17 border the XRL site boundary, it is reasonable to assume that the
average TSP concentration of these two stations can represent XRL
generated dust concentrations plus
prevailing background dust concentrations at the WKCD area. While the 5‑year
average TSP concentration in urban
areas as obtained from EPD’s urban air quality monitoring stations (74.2
µg/m3 from Table.14.3.4)
is comparable to that from the XRL data (68.4 µg/m3 from Table
14.3.5),
it is considered that using the XRL monitoring data is a
more reasonable estimate for the WKCD area TSP assessment. This is because there is a sufficient amount
of XRL data (about 3 years’ data) and the XRL monitoring stations are in close
proximity to the WKCD site whereas the EPD’s monitoring stations are at much
larger distances (1.91 km to 8.65 km) from the site.
Operational air quality contaminants of significance to the Project area include: SO2, from marine; NO2, from vehicles and marine; RSP, from vehicles and marine. The 5-year average concentrations for these pollutants are detailed in Table 14.3.6.
Table
14.3.6: Average
Background Air Pollutant Concentrations from EPD’s Urban Air Monitoring
Stations (Year 2007-2011)
Pollutant |
Urban Stations and 5-year Average Concentration (μg/m3) |
AQO criteria (μg/m3) |
5-year Average Concentration (μg/m3) |
||||
Tsuen Wan |
Kwai Chung |
Sham Shui Po |
Kwun Tong |
Central/ Western |
|||
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) |
19.8 |
24.4 |
17.4 |
13.8 |
17.6 |
80 |
18.6 |
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) |
63.2 |
64.6 |
68.4 |
60.4 |
52.8 |
80 |
61.9 |
Respirable Suspended Particulate (RSP/PM10) |
51.2 |
50.4 |
51.2 |
48.8 |
49.6 |
55 |
50.2 |
In addition to the urban air quality
monitoring stations, EPD had operated a local air quality monitoring station at
the WKCD site to record background air pollutant concentrations from September
2011 to August 2012. Although the monitoring data is only for a single year,
the recorded information is useful as a direct indication of the onsite air
quality. Table 14.3.7
shows the background air quality data for the WKCD
site for 2011-2012 (see details in Appendix 3.20).
Table
14.3.7: Average
Background Air Pollutant Concentrations from EPD’s Local Monitoring Station at
WKCD Site (September 2011 – August 2012)
Pollutant |
Annual Average Concentration (μg/m3) |
AQO criteria (μg/m3) |
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) |
11.4 |
80 |
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) |
46.7 |
80 |
Respirable Suspended Particulate (RSP/PM10) |
45.0 |
55 |
By comparing the EPD’s onsite monitoring results at WKCD with the 5-year average from
the urban monitoring stations, it can be seen that the onsite monitoring
results are significantly lower – approximately 39% lower for SO2,
25% lower for NO2, and 10% lower for RSP.
The future background air pollutant concentrations
to be used for predicting the total air quality impact due to operational phase
for NO2 RSP and SO2 are as extracted from the PATH model
(for year 2015) released by EPD in December 2012.
Construction
of the WKCD basement will be carried out in zones, with construction of Zone 1
aimed at commencement in 2013 for completion of Zones 1 to 3 in 2017 (see Appendix 2.4 for the assumed construction
programme). During construction, the major activities that would
generate construction dust emissions include the following:
¡ Excavation activities;
¡ Foundation works;
¡ Concrete batching plant and barging points (assumed to be handed over from the XRL project to WKCD);
¡ Site Formation, and;
¡ Movement of mobile plant and vehicles on haul roads.
Based on a review of the construction methods adopted for the WKCD Project, construction dust will be potentially generated from the aforementioned land-based construction activities and is therefore identified as the representative pollutants. Therefore, it is considered appropriate to adopt total suspended particulate (TSP) as the key pollutant during the construction phase. According to the “2011 Hong Kong Emission Inventory Report” published by EPD in March 2013, which is the latest available information at the time of preparing this Report, the top 3 major sources of RSP include navigation, road transport and public electricity generation, which collectively accounted for about 72% of the total RSP emission in 2011 whereas non-combustion sources only constituted about 15% of the total emission. Since construction dust is only one of the various non-combustion sources, it is considered that RSP would not be a representative pollutant of construction dust.
Due to construction of concurrent projects in the vicinity, cumulative impacts are expected. Table 14.3.8 summarises the concurrent projects that may contribute to cumulative construction dust impacts.
Table 14.3.8: Summary of concurrent projects during construction phase
Project |
Construction Period |
Possible Cumulative Impact |
Included in Cumulative Impact Assessment |
Hong Kong Section of the |
Jan 2010 – 2015 |
Dust emissions from construction of the West Kowloon Terminus and operation of the concrete batching plant and barging points |
Yes |
Road Works at |
2011 – 2014 |
According to the EIA, major dusty construction activities and excavation works are to be completed by March 2012. Minor dust emissions may arise from the remaining road works and movement of mobile plant and vehicles |
No |
Road Improvement Works in |
Late 2013 / early 2014 – end 2015 |
Dust emissions from the roadworks construction and movement of mobile plant and vehicles |
Yes |
Central |
2015 – end 2020 |
Dust emissions from construction works |
Yes |
As an updated schedule of construction works for the WKT of the XRL project is not available for 2013-2015, it is not possible to incorporate realistic dust emission sources of WKT into the FDM model for assessment of cumulative impacts. As such, relevant EM&A monitoring data of the XRL project is used to assess the potential cumulative impacts as described below.
With reference to the dust monitoring results from the two air quality monitoring stations (AM16 and AM17) in the vicinity of the WKCD site from March 2010 to December 2012 inclusive, the average TSP concentration during that construction period of WKT has been calculated, as shown in Appendix 3.27 . It is reasonable to assume that the average TSP concentration from these two dust monitoring stations can represent XRL generated dust concentrations plus prevailing background dust concentrations at the WKCD area. The background concentration used for the TSP assessment for the underpass road is therefore taken as 68.4 µg/m3 (Table 14.3.5).
For the Central Kowloon Route (CKR) project, its construction dust impact assessment area overlaps part of the corresponding assessment area for the underpass road. Therefore, the relevant TSP modelling results from the published EIA of CKR project have been added to those of the underpass road for ASRs that are within the overlapped portion of both assessment areas in order to assess the cumulative effects.
14.3.3.3 Operation Phase – Vehicular Emissions
During the operation phase, there will be cumulative air quality impacts on the ASRs due to vehicular emissions from:
¡ Existing and proposed open roads outside the underpass road area but within the 500 m assessment area;
¡ Proposed underpasses/landscape decks along the Austin Road West and Lin Cheung Road and the associated top openings under the Road Works at West Kowloon project, which is within the 500 m assessment area; and
¡ Portal of the existing Western Harbour Crossing (WHC) which is in the vicinity of the underpass road site.
¡ Ventilation exhausts and portals serving the planned underground roads within the WKCD area.
It should be noted that all of the above
vehicular emission sources, except the planned underground roads within WKCD,
are due to the current and planned road networks serving the West Kowloon
area. Therefore, it is anticipated that
the underpass road itself would only have a relatively small contribution to
total vehicular emissions in the area.
On the contrary, the WKCD development would be subject to potential air
quality impacts that are largely generated by the existing/planned road traffic
in the area.
The air quality inside the WKCD basement where the underground vehicle roads are located should meet the air pollutant standards as recommended by the EPD’s Practice Note on Control of Air Pollution in Vehicle Tunnels (see Table 14.3.2). Therefore, the basement ventilation system should be properly designed by WKCDA’s consultant/engineer to adequately remove or dilute vehicle emissions and the basement air quality should be monitored to ensure compliance with the relevant air quality standards.
14.3.3.4 Operation Phase – Marine Traffic Emissions
There are existing marine activities within the 500 m assessment area that will contribute to the background emissions, which include:
¡ Fast ferry traffic movements, based on scheduled sailings, of up to 170 daily movements (ferry going to is one movement, ferry leaving is a second movement) at the China Ferry Terminal;
¡ Tugs associated with Derrick lighter barge movements in the NYMTTS;
¡ Derrick lighter barges operating at the New Yau Ma Tei Public Cargo Working Area (NYPCWA), and;
¡ Ocean Cruise Ship berthing at the Ocean Terminal.
Although emissions from all the above
current marine activities are not attributable to the underpass road
development, the WKCD development would be subject to potential air quality
impacts caused by such marine emissions.
Under
the current development of marine traffic planning at the WKCD site, it is
intended that marine services at WKCD will primarily be provided for visitor or
leisure activities. In terms of traffic volume, the support on the need of the
possible piers has been a key outcome from the public consultation in view of
general public's opinions and needs. No precedence case or similar scale of
development as the WKCD has been developed in the
14.3.3.5 Operation Phase – Industrial Emissions
Chimney survey and desktop study have been conducted to identify any existing or planned chimneys of industrial operations within the 500m assessment area. Based on the survey and desktop study findings, no existing or planned chimneys were identified within the assessment area.
14.3.3.6 Operation Phase – Identification of Key Air Pollutants of Concern
As presented in Section 14.3.1.2, under the APCO, AQOs are stipulated for seven criteria air pollutants, namely, nitrogen
dioxide (NO2), sulphur dioxide (SO2), total suspended
particulates (TSP), respirable suspended particulates (RSP), carbon monoxide
(CO), ozone and lead. As identified in Sections 14.3.3.3 and 14.3.3.4,
during the operation phase, the existing/planned ASRs within the 500m assessment area would be subject to potential air
quality impacts due to emissions from the underpass road and the nearby road
traffic as well as the surrounding marine traffic/vessels. Each of the seven criteria pollutants has
been reviewed for its relevance to such major air pollution sources of the
Project as follows.
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
According to the “2011 Hong Kong Emission Inventory Report” published by EPD in March 2013, navigation and road transport
are the top two major sources of nitrogen
oxides (NOx) generated in
Respirable Suspended Particulates
(RSP)
According to the latest statistics
of “2011 Hong Kong Emission Inventory Report”, navigation and road transport are the top two major sources of RSP in Hong Kong, accounting for respectively about 37% and 19% of the total RSP emissions in 2011. As summarised in Table
14.3.6, the latest 5-year average of the
annual RSP concentration in the urban area is about 91%
of the corresponding AQO. Therefore, RSP has been identified as a key air pollutant of the
emissions from both road traffic and marine traffic/
vessels, and has been assessed against the relevant AQOs for this Project.
According to the latest statistics
of “2011 Hong Kong Emission Inventory Report”, 54% of total SO2 emission in Hong Kong is attributed to navigation whereas only
below 1% of the total emission is due to road transport. The
introduction of ultra low sulphur diesel for vehicle fleet in 2000 has also helped reducing the SO2
emission from road transport in
Ozone
According to the “Air Quality in Hong Kong 2011”
published by EPD, ozone is a major constituent of
photochemical smog. It is not a pollutant directly emitted from man-made sources but formed by
photochemical reactions of primary pollutants
such as NOx and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) under sunlight. As it takes several hours for these
photochemical reactions to take place, ozone recorded in one place could be attributed to VOC and
NOx emissions from places afar. Hence, ozone
is a regional air pollution problem. In other words, unlike such air pollutants as NOx,,RSP and SO2, ozone is not a pollutant directly attributable to emissions from nearby marine or road
traffic. As a result, ozone is not
identified as a key air pollutant for air quality impact assessment for this
Project, though it is one of the criteria pollutants under the AQO.
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
According to the latest statistics
of “2011 Hong Kong Emission Inventory Report”, road transport and navigation are the top two
major sources of CO emissions in
Hong Kong, contributing to respectively about 67% and 18% of the total CO emission in
2011.
However, based on the “Air Quality in Hong Kong 2012 Preliminary Report”
published by EPD, the
highest 1-hour CO level and the highest 8-hour CO concentration in Mong Kok are
respectively 3,590 μg/m3 and 2,755 μg/m3, which are only 12% and 28% of the corresponding AQO respectively. Given that the ambient CO levels are well below the relevant AQO with large margins as opposed to the other pollutants such as RSP
and NO2, it is considered appropriate to select RSP and NO2,
but not CO, as the key pollutants for air quality impact assessment against the AQO
for this Project.
Lead
Since leaded petrol was banned in Hong Kong on 1 April 1999, it is
no longer considered as a primary source in
Identified Key Air Pollutants
Based on the above review results, the
following key air pollutants of concerns are identified for the purpose of air
quality impact assessment during the operation phase:
· For road traffic emissions – NO2 and RSP; and
· For marine traffic/vessel emissions – SO2, NO2 and RSP.
14.3.4 Assessment Methodology
Introduction
To assess the construction phase through air quality modelling, use of the air quality model Fugitive Dust Model (FDM) was required. In accordance with the EPD’s Guidelines on Choice of Models and Model Parameters, FDM was used to predict the air pollutant concentrations due to fugitive and open dust source impacts, which are shown in Figures 3.3a-k and 3.4a-f. Details of the emission rates from the activities are given in Appendices 3.1 to 3.3.
FDM
is a computerised air quality model specifically designed for computing the concentration
and deposition impacts from fugitive dust sources. The model is generally based
on the well-known Gaussian Plume formulation for computing concentrations, but
the model has been specifically adapted to incorporate an improved gradient
transfer deposition algorithm. FDM is one of the air quality models listed as
commonly used for EIA studies by EPD in Guidelines
on Choice of Models and Model Parameters.
It should
be noted that FDM and all Gaussian based dispersion models have limited ability
to predict dispersion in the following situations:[1]
¡ Causality effects
Gaussian plume models assume pollutant
material is transported in a straight line instantly (like a beam of light) to
receptors that may be several hours or more in transport time away from the
source. The model takes no account for the fact that the wind may only be
blowing at 1 m/s and will have only travelled 3.6 km in the first hour.
This means that Gaussian models cannot account for causality effects, where the
plume may meander across the terrain as the wind speed or direction changes.
This effect is not considered to be significant for the WKCD site as the site
is small.
¡ Low wind speeds
Gaussian-plume models ‘break down’ during low wind speed or calm conditions due to the inverse speed dependence of the steady state plume equation. These models usually set a minimum wind speed of 0.5 m/s or 1.0 m/s and ignore or overwrite data below this limit.
¡ Straight-line trajectories
Gaussian models will typically overestimate terrain impingement effects during stable conditions because they do not account for turning or rising wind caused by the terrain itself. This effect is not considered to be important for WKCD as the site and surrounding terrain is flat.
¡ Spatially uniform meteorological conditions
Gaussian models assume that the atmosphere is uniform across the entire modelling domain, and that transport and dispersion conditions exist unchanged long enough for the material to reach the receptor even if this is several kilometres away. In the atmosphere, truly uniform conditions rarely occur. As the WKCD site and surrounding assessment area is sufficiently small with no significant terrain features, uniform meteorological conditions are considered appropriate.
¡ No memory of previous hour’s emissions
In calculating each hour’s ground-level concentrations, Gaussian models have no memory of the contaminants released during the previous hours. This limitation is especially important for the proper simulation of morning inversion break-up, fumigation and diurnal recycling of pollutants.
During the construction stage, the study
area will not have many tall buildings. As such, the "Guideline on Air Quality model (revised), EPA - 450/2-78-027R,
July 1986" is used to calculate the roughness length for use in FDM.
The EPD guideline on "Choice of Models and Model Parameters" states: the
selection of rural or urban dispersion coefficients in a specific application
should follow a land use classification procedure. If the land use types
including industrial, commercial and residential uses account for 50% or more
of an area within a 3 km radius from the source, the site is classified as
urban; otherwise it is classified as rural. The surface roughness height is
closely related to the land use characteristics of a study area and associated
with the roughness element height. As a first approximation, the surface
roughness can be estimated as 3 to 10 percent of the average height of physical
structures. Typical values used for urban and new development areas are 370 cm
and 100 cm, respectively.
Within a three kilometre radius of the site 55% is classified as urban and the remaining 45% is sea. As the sea roughness is typically given a value of 0.01 cm and urban is assumed to be 370 cm, an area averaged roughness height of 205 cm is used. This is to take account of the low turbulence over the sea water, and also the very large turbulence generated due to nearby large structures.
Hourly meteorological data for a full year as extracted from PATH model released by EPD in December 2012 (metrological data year 2010, grid 28, 27) has been adopted for use in FDM and is considered to be the most up to date data available. PATH data has been observed to have a lower mixing height for some hours, when compared to the measured mixing height. The minimum mixing height recorded by HKO in 2010 is 121.3 m, whereas the PATH minimum mixing height is 40 m. The HKO minimum mixing height of 121.3 m is used to replace any PATH mixing height below this value. This approach is considered appropriate as it will minimise over-estimation due to lower mixing heights and also will minimise under-estimation due to high stacks being excluded in the mixing volume. The PATH data with the above modification is considered to be representative of the site wind data at the underpass road site.
Prediction of dust emissions is based on emissions factors from the Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors (AP-42), 5th
Edition published by the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The
emission factor for a typical heavy construction activity is 2.69 megagrams
(Mg)/hectare/month according to Section 13.2.3.3
of AP-42. The number of working days
for a month and number of working hours per day of the project are anticipated to be 26 days and 12
hours respectively. No construction work is anticipated to be carried out on
Sundays. Based on Table 11.9-4 of AP-42, the emission factor of wind
erosion is 0.85 megagrams (Mg)/hectare/year. The locations of assumed dust sources are given in Figures 3.3a to 3.3k. The key dust
emission factors adopted in FDM are summarised in Table
14.3.9.
For the mitigated scenario, the active construction areas have ground
watering applied once per hour or 12 times per day. This gives rise to dust
suppression of 91.7%, as estimated in Appendix 3.8. The unmitigated scenario does not employ any watering for dust
suppression.
For the concrete batching plant, it is assumed that the plant will be
handed over from the XRL project to the WKCD (including underpass road) Project,
and therefore the emissions from the plant will be the same as those given in
the approved EIA for XRL. All assumptions and calculations are extracted from
the Specified Process (SP) License issued to the XRL for the concrete batching
plant. The concrete batching plant and haul roads within the site are
modelled as having operation hours of 12 hours per day, that is, from
7:00 am to 7:00 pm.
No stockpile is modelled as excavated material is anticipated to be transported out of the site immediately after generation. Barging points are assumed to be handed over from the XRL project to the WKCD Project, and therefore the emissions from the plant will be the same as those given in the approved EIA for XRL.
The emission inventory and
calculation of emission factors for the
construction activities are detailed
in Appendices
3.1 to 3.3.
Table
14.3.9: Key
Dust Emission Factors Adopted in the
Assessment
Activities |
Emission Factors |
Reference |
Heavy construction activities including all above ground and open construction works, excavation and slope cutting works |
2.69 Mg/hectare/month |
Section
13.2.3.3 AP-42, 5th
Edition |
Wind erosion from heavy construction |
0.85 Mg/hectare/year |
Table 11.9-4 AP-42, 5th
Edition |
Paved haul road within concrete batching plant |
Emission
Factor
= k
x (sL) 0.91 x (W) 1.02
g/VKT where k
is particle size multiplier * sL
is road surface silt loading W is average truck weight |
Section 13.2.1 AP-42, 5th
Edition (Jan 2011 edition) |
* The particle size
distribution was made reference to Section 13.2.1(Table 13.2.1-1) of the USEPA
Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors (AP-42), 5th Edition (Jan 2011
edition).
With addition of the average background TSP concentration of two monitoring stations as described in Section 14.3.3.1, i.e., 68.4 μg/m 3, the hourly, daily and annual TSP concentrations at the identified ASRs have been predicted and compared with the hourly, daily and annual average TSP criteria of 500 µg/m3, 260 µg/m3 and 80 µg/m3 respectively.
Construction of the underpass road is to be
completed in stages; as such the FDM assessment has been completed for each
construction year from 2013 to 2017, when the majority of the site works are
expected to be completed.
For
hourly and daily TSP, a tiered modelling approach has been adopted. Tier 1
assumes 100% active area for a given
year is emitting TSP. This Tier 1 scenario (i.e. assuming 100% active
area for the Project and the concurrent project) is hypothetical and for
screening purposes to identify which
ASRs may be subject to TSP concentrations above the relevant standards. For the purpose of the Tier 1 screening, the
dust mitigation measures, including frequent water spraying, are taken into
account when estimating the dust emission rates from the construction
activities. Details of the Tier 1 dust sources including their coordinates,
dimensions and estimated emission rates are detailed in Appendix 3.4. Locations of the assumed
dust sources for Tier 1 assessment are shown in Figure 3.3a to 3.3k. The Tier 1 hourly
and daily TSP levels at all the ASRs are then predicted for both scenarios of
with and without the dust mitigation measures in place.
The ASRs identified with hourly or daily TSP non-compliance under Tier 1 screening, where mitigation measures are in place, are selected for the subsequent Tier 2 assessment.
The entire works area is broken into a
number of zones for construction timetabling purposes. Based on the assumed
construction plant inventory of individual zones and planned construction
activities for each year, the percentage active areas for different zones are
calculated, as summarised in Table 14.3.10. The maximum percentage active area for
each year is taken from all zones and applied to the entire site.
It is assumed in the Tier 2 assessment that the maximum percentage
active area of the underpass road excavation site for each zone and the
corresponding active areas of the relevant concurrent project would be located
closest to the ASR being assessed. The Tier 2 hourly or daily TSP levels at
each of these ASRs are then predicted with the dust mitigation measures in
place.
Under normal circumstances, construction
activities for the proposed Project and the concurrent projects would likely
spread over the whole work sites and zones. As such, the maximum percentage
active area calculated from all zones, applied to the entire WKCD site, and the
corresponding active areas of the relevant concurrent project to be located
closest to a particular ASR at any one time during the Tier 2 assessment is a
conservative approach. Details of the Tier 2 dust sources including their
coordinates, dimensions and estimated emission rates are given in Appendix 3.5. Locations of the assumed dust sources for Tier 2 assessment are shown in Figures 3.4a to 3.4f.
For the assessment of annual TSP concentrations, the active work area
over the entire year would be less than that for a typical working hour or a
typical working day. The percentage active area averaged over each construction
year has been estimated for each zone as summarised in Table 14.3.10. The annual TSP assessment is based on the
percentage active areas for individual zones. The annual TSP levels are
predicted at all the ASRs for both scenarios of with and without the dust
mitigation measures in place. Details of the dust sources for annual TSP
assessment including their coordinates, dimensions and estimated emission rates
are given in Appendix 3.6. Locations
of assumed dust sources for annual assessment are shown in Figure 3.3a to 3.3k.
Based on project-specific information, the percentages active work areas
for heavy construction activities for hourly, daily and annual TSP assessment have
been estimated and are summarised in Table 14.3.10. Detailed
estimation of the percentages active work areas are provided in Appendix 3.7.
Table 14.3.10: Summary of tentative active area calculations for Tier 2 and Annual TSP assessment
Construction Year |
Zone |
Percentage Active Area |
||
Hourly |
Daily |
Annually |
||
2013 |
1 |
47.1% |
47.1% |
18.4% |
|
2a |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
2b |
17.8% |
17.8% |
6.1% |
|
3 |
21.1% |
21.1% |
3.5% |
|
4 |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
5 |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
The Park (A, B, C) |
1.4% |
1.4% |
0.8% |
|
Maximum |
47.1% |
47.1% |
18.4% |
2014 |
1 |
3.7% |
3.7% |
1.3% |
|
2a |
66.1% |
66.1% |
44.6% |
|
2b |
13.4% |
13.4% |
9.0% |
|
3 |
16.1% |
16.1% |
9.6% |
|
4 |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
5 |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
The Park (A, B, C) |
9.9% |
9.9% |
9.9% |
|
Maximum |
66.1% |
66.1% |
44.6% |
2015 |
1 |
0.9% |
0.9% |
0.8% |
|
2a |
6.5% |
6.5% |
5.7% |
|
2b |
4.5% |
4.5% |
3.9% |
|
3 |
5.1% |
5.1% |
2.2% |
|
4 |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
5 |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
The Park (A, B, C) |
0.3% |
0.3% |
0.3% |
|
Maximum |
6.5% |
6.5% |
5.7% |
2016 |
1 |
0.6% |
0.6% |
0.6% |
|
2a |
1.3% |
1.3% |
0.7% |
|
2b |
0.6% |
0.6% |
0.3% |
|
3 |
0.2% |
0.2% |
0.2% |
|
4 |
22.9% |
22.9% |
16.7% |
|
5 |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
The Park (A, B, C) |
0.5% |
0.5% |
0.5% |
|
Maximum |
22.9% |
22.9% |
16.7% |
2017 |
1 |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
2a |
3.2% |
3.2% |
3.2% |
|
2b |
0.7% |
0.7% |
0.7% |
|
3 |
0.2% |
0.2% |
0.2% |
|
4 |
13.0% |
13.0% |
3.7% |
|
5 |
3.1% |
3.1% |
1.8% |
|
The Park (A, B, C) |
2.4% |
2.4% |
1.6% |
|
Maximum |
13.0% |
13.0% |
3.7% |
Note: (a) The Tier 2 assessment for hourly and daily TSP uses the maximum percentage active area for all zones.
(b) The assessment of annual TSP uses zone specific percentage active area.
14.3.4.2 Operation Phase – Vehicular Emissions
Introduction
To assess the operational air quality, a
variety of models were required. In accordance with the EPD’s
Guidelines on Choice of Models and Model
Parameters, the
following air dispersion models have been employed to predict the cumulative NO2
and RSP levels at the identified ASRs:
¡ EMFAC-HK V2.5.1 (I and M) model has been used to determine the fleet average emission factors, for all the planned and existing roads within the 500 m assessment area, including planned underpass roads within WKCD site, and the proposed Central Kowloon Route (CKR). The model has included the effect of Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) program and is applicable for calendar years between 2013 and 2040.
¡ CALINE4 has been used to predict the air pollutant concentrations due to vehicular emissions from all open road links within the 500 m assessment area, which are as shown in Figures 3.5.1a to 3.5.1y.
¡ ISCST3 has been used to predict the air pollutant concentrations due to vehicular emissions from the Western Harbour Crossing (WHC) portal (modelled as volume sources); the proposed underpasses/landscape deck portals (modelled as volume sources) and the associated top openings (modelled as area source) under the Road Works at West Kowloon project; as well as from the assumed ventilation serving the planned underground roads within the WKCD site (modelled as volume or point sources). The locations of all such pollution sources are as shown in Figure 3.6.
¡ Pollutants in the Atmosphere and the Transport over Hong Kong (PATH) has been used to predict the current background air pollution due to sources outside the project boundary. Sources include, but are not limited to, the Pearl River Deltas Economic Zone (PRDEZ), the Hong Kong International Airport, power plants in HKSAR. roads beyond the WKCD and, marine emissions. Background data predicted by PATH for year 2015 represents the worst case year relevant to the assessment of the Project.
The localised impacts due to the vehicle
emissions within the 500 m assessment area of underpass road have been
separately modelled by the near-field models (CALINE4 and ISCST3) in which the
vehicular emission factors have been calculated from the EMFAC-HKV2.5.1 model.
The cumulative hourly maximum NOx
and RSP concentrations are predicted by the above models by using the
corresponding MM5 hourly meteorological data in 2010 as extracted from the PATH
model released by EPD in December 2012.
Model Description – EMFAC-HK – EMFAC-HKV2.5.1
EMFAC-HKV2.5.1
is an emissions inventory model that calculates emissions inventories for motor
vehicles operating on roads in
Assumptions and Inputs – EMFAC-HK
For all
the planned and
existing roads within the 500 m assessment area including
those planned underpass roads within WKCD site and the proposed CKR,
the EMFAC-HK V2.5.1 model (I and M). which
is the latest version at the time of preparing this report, has been used to
determine the fleet average emission factors.
The Burden
mode, used for calculating area-specific emission factors, has been selected in
the model. Under this mode, the total emissions of pollutants such as RSP and
NOx were computed for each type of vehicle class based on
temperature, relative humidity, speed corrected emission factors and vehicle
activity. Hourly output was selected.
The assumptions and input parameters on modelling of vehicle emission factors
are presented in the following sections. The traffic data used for the
assessment includes the hourly traffic flows of 16 vehicle classes at various
road links and the speed fractions of various vehicle classes in four model years. The model
years are: 2015 (the year when operation of the Project was originally planned
to commence); intermediate years 2020 and 2025, and 2030 (15 years after
commencement of operation of the Project).
According to the recently updated Project programme (see Appendix
2.4), the planned commencement of
operation of the Project has been changed to 2017. Despite the change, the EMFAC results as
presented in Graph 14.2 show that
year 2015 represents the worst case scenario where the total traffic emission
is the highest among all model years of 2015, 2020, 2025 and 2030. In other words, the total traffic emission in
year 2017 when the Project is planned to commence operation is anticipated to
be lower than that in year 2015.
Therefore, use of the emission estimates in 2015 for air quality impact
assessment is a conservative approach.
Traffic
data is provided by the Traffic Consultant, and are presented in the following
sections.
The traffic forecast data has been submitted to the Transport Department (TD) for review.
TD has no objection in principle to the traffic data. The correspondence from
TD is provided in Appendix
3.9 for reference. The 24-hour traffic patterns are given in
Appendix 3.10.
The
emission standards, according to the latest implementation programme (as of November
2012) have been adopted in EMFAC-HK V2.5.1 model for vehicles registered in
Road Grouping
The road
links for assessment have been grouped into five types.
Emission factors for the following five road types have been calculated:
¡ Road Type 1 - Expressway (Design speed limit: 100kph);
¡ Road Type 2 - Trunk Road (Design speed limit: 80kph);
¡ Road Type 3 - Trunk Road (Design speed limit: 50kph);
¡ Road Type 4 - Local Roads (Design speed limit: 50kph), and;
¡ Road Type 5 - Trunk Road (Design speed limit: 70kph).
The five road
types are characterised by continuous and interrupted flow with different
design speed limits. It is assumed that there is continuous traffic flow in
Expressway and Trunk Roads (Road Types 1, 2, 3 & 5), whereas there is
interrupted flow in Local Roads (Road Type 4). The road type classification
of individual road links in the assessment
area are as shown in Figures 3.5.1a to 3.5.1y.
Road Type 5 is associated with the CKR and will not be present in 2015
or 2020, but will be present in 2025 and 2030, as CKR is anticipated to be in
operation in 2021.
Vehicles
operating on open roads have been categorised into 16 vehicle classes according
to the Guideline on Modelling Vehicle
Emission – Appendix I for EMFAC-HK V2.5.1, and is presented in Table 14.3.11.
Table 14.3.11: Vehicle Classification in the EMFAC-HK Model
Index |
Description |
Notation in EMFAC-HK Model |
Fuel Type |
Gross Vehicle Weight |
1 |
Private Cars (PC) |
PC |
ALL |
ALL |
3 |
Taxi |
taxi |
ALL |
ALL |
4 |
Light Goods Vehicles (<=2.5t) |
LGV3 |
ALL |
<=2.5ton |
5 |
Light Goods Vehicles (2.5-3.5t) |
LGV4 |
ALL |
>2.5-3.5ton |
6 |
Light Goods Vehicles (3.5-5.5t) |
LGV6 |
ALL |
>3.5ton |
7 |
Medium & Heavy Goods Vehicles (5.5-15t) |
HGV7 |
ALL |
>5.5ton-15ton |
8 |
Medium & Heavy Goods Vehicles (>=15t) |
HGV8 |
ALL |
>15ton |
11 |
Public Light Buses |
PLB |
ALL |
ALL |
12 |
Private Light Buses (<=3.5t) |
PV4 |
ALL |
<=3.5ton |
13 |
Private Light Buses (>3.5t) |
PV5 |
ALL |
>3.5ton |
14 |
Non-franchised Buses (<6.4t) |
NFB6 |
ALL |
<=6.4ton |
15 |
Non-franchised Buses (6.4-15t) |
NFB7 |
ALL |
>6.4ton – 15ton |
16 |
Non-franchised Buses (>15t) |
NFB8 |
ALL |
<=15ton |
17 |
Single Deck Franchised Buses |
FBSD |
ALL |
ALL |
18 |
Double Deck Franchised Buses |
FBDD |
ALL |
ALL |
19 |
Motor Cycles |
MC |
ALL |
ALL |
Exhaust /
Evaporation Technology Fraction
Vehicle
classes are grouped with different exhaust technology indexes and technology
fractions. Each technology group represent a distinct emission control
technologies. The
EMFAC-HK V2.5.1 model has a set of default exhaust technology fractions which
best represents the scheduled implementation of new vehicle emission standards
as of November 2012. As there is no update to the planned emission control
measures since the release of the guideline in November 2012, the default
exhaust technology fractions are considered to be applicable in this
assessment.
According
to the Guideline on Modelling Vehicle
Emissions, the vehicle population forecast function in
EMFAC-HKV2.5.1 used 2010 as the base year. Natural replacement of vehicles and
a set of annual growth rates and survival rates for different vehicles are
assumed for 2011 to 2040. In particular, vehicles including private cars,
motorcycles, and goods vehicles are assumed to grow by a varying percentage
(from 0% - 2.5% annual) during the period whereas the number of franchised
buses, public light buses and taxis are assumed to have no growth.
There have been some minor policy changes from April 2012 to November
2012. The changes include moving two diesel taxis (TAXI) to the private car
(PC) category and moving 4 LPG Private light buses (PV4) to the PV5 category.
These changes, however, are considered to be insignificant and therefore have
been excluded from the assessment. The default populations from the April 2012
population information have been adopted for the model years (2015, 2020, 2025,
and 2030). The vehicle age distributions, in the base year 2010, are presented
in Appendix
3.11 for reference.
The use of
electric vehicles (EVs), which do not have tailpipe emissions, has been
promoted by the government in the recent years. By April 2012, there were more
than 310 EVs in
Default values
and compositions have been adopted with reference to in the EMFAC-HKV2.5.1
Guideline.
Diurnal Variation of Daily Vehicle
Kilometres Travelled (VKT)
For each vehicle
class, the Vehicle Kilometres Travelled (VKT) of individual hours is calculated
by multiplying the hourly number of vehicles with the length of the
corresponding road link (in kilometres). Diurnal (24-hour) traffic pattern has
been provided by Traffic Consultant. The lengths of individual road links of
the connecting road are given in Appendix
3.12.
The 24-hour VKT values for all vehicle classes in each of the model years 2015,
2020, 2025 and 2030 together with a graphical plot, are provided in Appendix
3.13.
The daily trips
were used to estimate the cold start emissions of the petrol and LPG vehicles
only, as is prescribed by the model. Therefore, trips for vehicles other than
petrol or LPG type vehicles would be assumed to be zero. Different road types
have different number of trips as follows.
Expressway
and Trunk Road (Road Types 1, 2 & 3)
Zero trips are
assumed in Expressway and Trunk Roads since there will be no cold start under
normal circumstances.
Local
Road (Road Type 4)
Trip within assessment area
= (Trip within HK/VKT within HK) x VKT within assessment
area
Trip
within HK is the default data of EMFAC-HKV2.5.1 model. VKT within
HK is the VKT of local roads in
While the number of trips is dependent on
vehicle population, no project-specific vehicle population data can be
identified for the assessment area according to the Traffic Consultants.
However, project-specific VKT has been estimated based on the traffic forecast
in the assessment area. Moreover, it can be argued that VKT is related to
vehicle population in such a way that a higher vehicle population would
generally result in a higher VKT. As a result, it has been proposed to estimate
the number of trips in the assessment area on the basis of the project-specific
VKT and the assumption that the number of trips per VKT in the
assessment area would be similar to the number of trips per VKT in
Hourly Temperature and Relative Humidity Profile
Annual and monthly hourly average
ambient temperature and relative humidity obtained from the
meteorological data as extracted from the 2010 HKO’s King’s Park meteorology
station (with at least
90% valid data) have been
adopted. The 24-hour variations of the annual averages of temperature and
relative humidity are presented graphically in Appendix 3.15.
The 24-hour speed fractions for
different road types and individual vehicle classes are provided by the Traffic
Consultant, and are calculated based on the 24-hour traffic flow in each model
year and the volume/capacity ratio of different road types. For each vehicle
class, the VKT of each road link was grouped into sub-groups with speed bins of
8 km/h (0 - 8 km/h, 8 - 16 km/h, 16 - 24 km/h, etc.). The speed fraction
of each sub-group was derived by the summation of the total VKT of road link
within this sub-group divided by the total VKT of all road links. The estimated
speed fractions provided by the Traffic Consultant are given in Appendix
3.16.
Predicted Emission Factors by EMFAC-HKV2.5.1 model
To determine the emissions with 15 years after
commencement of the Project, emission rates were modelled for years 2015, 2020,
2025 and 2030. Upon modelling with EMFAC-HKV2.5.1, the emissions for each
vehicle class at different hours are then divided by the corresponding VKT to
obtain 24-hr emission factors in grams/vehicle-kilometre (g/veh-km). The calculations of emission factors for each model year are
shown in Appendix 3.17. By comparing the total emissions in different model years
as shown in Graph
14.2, year 2015
represents the worst case scenario where the total emission is the
highest among all model years. Even with addition of the traffic due to the CKR
project after 2020, the worst-case year is still predicted to be 2015. This is because despite the increased traffic
volume, the total emissions are expected to decrease as a result of the
retirement of older and more polluting vehicles in the fleet, which would be
replaced with newer vehicles with lower emissions. Therefore, it is proposed to
use the emission factors of this worst case year 2015 for the prediction of air
quality impacts due to vehicular emissions in order to arrive at conservative
impact assessment results.
Although the planned commencement year of operation
of the Project has been updated from 2015 to 2017, use of the emission factors
in 2015 represents conservative emissions for the assessment. This is because
the total traffic emission in year 2017 is anticipated to be lower than that in
year 2015 as illustrated in Graph
14.2.
Graph 14.2: Comparison of RSP and NOx EMFAC results for
2015, 2020, 2025 and 2030
|
|
The Industrial Source Complex – Short Term version 3 (ISCST3) dispersion model was used to model the air pollutant concentrations due to vehicular emissions from the Western Harbour Crossing (WHC) portal (modelled as volume sources); the proposed underpasses/landscape deck portals (modelled as volume sources) and the associated top openings (modelled as area source) under the Road Works at West Kowloon project; as well as from the assumed ventilation serving the planned underground roads within the WKCD site (modelled as point or volume sources).
ISCST3 is a steady state Gaussian plume model which can be used to assess pollutant concentrations from sources associated with an industrial source complex. ISCST3 is one of the models prescribed by the EPD Guidelines on Choice of Models and Model Parameters. ISCST3 is considered an appropriate model to use for this situation as meteorological conditions will not vary greatly over the site, as the site is relatively flat and small and no significant effects are expected due to terrain variations.
It should be noted that ISCST3 and all Gaussian based dispersion models have limited ability to predict dispersion in the situations as described in Section 14.3.4.1.
Assumptions and Inputs – ISCST3
The operational sources for ISCST3 modelling (shown in Figure 3.6) include:
¡ Proposed underpasses/landscape decks along the Austin Road West and Lin Cheung Road and the associated top openings under the Road Works at West Kowloon project, which is within the 500 m assessment area;
¡ Portal of the existing WHC which is in the vicinity of the WKCD site; and
¡ Ventilation exhausts and portals serving the planned underground roads within the WKCD area.
EMFAC-HKV2.5.1 and the traffic modelling data from the Traffic Consultants were used to generate the inputs for use in ISCST3.
Hourly meteorological data for a full year as extracted from the PATH model released by EPD in December 2012 (meteorological data year 2010, grid 28, 27) has been adopted for use in ISCST3. The data is considered to be the most up to date data available, PATH data has been observed to have a lower mixing height for some hours, when compared to the measured mixing height. The minimum mixing height recorded by HKO in 2010 is 121.3 m, whereas the PATH minimum mixing height is 40 m. The HKO minimum mixing height of 121.3 m is used to replace any PATH mixing height below this value. This approach is considered appropriate as it will minimise over-estimation due to lower mixing heights and also will minimise under-estimation due to high stacks being excluded in the mixing volume. The PATH data with the above modification is considered to be representative of the site wind data at WKCD.
Ventilation Exhausts/Portals Serving WKCD
Basement
The basement will be ventilated through stacks; however the proportion released through stacks and through the portals cannot be determined until a comprehensive ventilation study is carried out during the detailed design phase. Two scenarios were therefore considered for the ventilation of the WKCD basement:
Scenario I – 100% of the vehicle emissions
generated within the basement is ventilated through a series of stack exhausts
and 0% through the basement entry and exit points
Under this Scenario, the exhausts are
assumed to be attached to buildings within the WKCD and were modelled as
6 m tall point sources with an exit air velocity of 2.0 m/s. The
stack diameter was dependant on the ventilation area. The basement is broken
into three areas, namely B1 Road, B1 Loading and B2 Carpark, for the purpose of
the ventilation calculations. The areas are
shown in Figures 3.5.1n, 3.5.1r, 3.5.1s and 3.5.1t;
Standard practice is to model ventilation
shafts as point sources. As the final dimensions of the exhaust louvres are yet
to be known at this stage, it is considered appropriate to model the basement
ventilation louvres as stacks. A single stack is used at approximately the
horizontal centre of the proposed louvre area to allow the greatest flexibility
in the final stack location.
The Practice Note ADM-2 recommends MTR
ventilation exhausts shall be located not closer than 5 m to any opening
such as an openable or fixed window, doorway, building ventilation system
intake or exhaust and the like in any building irrespective of whether such
vent shaft is freestanding or is accommodated in a building. Although there is
no such practice note for underground roads and tunnels, this basis has been
used to adopt a minimum stack height of 6 m. This is considered to give
worst case results at the ground level and allows for flexibility of the final
design and the ventilation to be located at this level.
There are several ventilation exhausts for
the XRL/WKT basement carpark, however this basement does not include an
underground road and therefore does not need to be considered as a concurrent
source.
Scenario II – 100% of the vehicle emissions
generated within the basement is ventilated through the basement entry and exit
points and 0% through a series of stack exhausts
Under this Scenario, the basement emissions
were considered as a total of the three roads (basements roads A, B and C) as shown in Figures 3.5.1n, 3.5.1r, 3.5.1s and 3.5.1t. The detailed design of the basement and
its ventilation
system is not yet complete; therefore it has been broadly assumed that the
emissions would be evenly distributed among the three entry/exit points to
approximate the scenario. Therefore, one
third of the total basement emissions were assumed to be emitted from the
western portal near the western tunnel, one third through the eastern portal
onto Austin Road West and one third through the northern portal onto Austin
Road West.
The basement entry and exit point are not
treated as a standard portal as the traffic does not exit directly from the
portal, that is the vehicles come to a T-intersection at the entry and exit
point for Location A and C as shown in Figure 3.6. The entry and exit points are modelled
as volume sources based on the dimensions of the opening.
Underpasses/landscape decks
along the Austin Road West and Lin Cheung Road and the associated top openings
The portal emissions are the worst case
emissions from portals and other openings of Austin Road West and Lin Cheung
Road. EPD’s Guidelines on Choice of
Models and Model Parameters recommends portals and similar openings are
modelled as volume sources according to the Permanent International of Road
Congresses (PIARC) XIXth World Road
Congress Report. To obtain worst case emissions from each top opening and
portal, using the recommended guideline the following situations were
considered:
¡ Scenario 1 - 10% of tunnel
emissions released through short top openings, the remainder released through
the tunnel portal;
¡ Scenario 2 - 20% of tunnel
emissions released through short top openings, the remainder released through
the tunnel portal;
¡ Scenario 3 - 30% of tunnel
emissions released through short top openings, the remainder released through
the tunnel portal, and;
¡ Scenario 4 - Maximum emissions
according to PIARC recommendations (which are dependent on top opening lengths
– 66% of emissions through top opening if he length is 50m and 100% through top
opening if the length is 100m), the remainder or emissions which are not released
through the top opening are released through the tunnel portal.
By adopting the traffic forecast in the
worst case year of 2015, the emission rates for Scenarios 1 to 4, with 100% of
the WKCD basement emission through its portals (Scenario II) are given in Appendix 3.18a
– Appendix 3.18d whereas the emission rates for Scenarios 1 to 4, with
100% of the WKCD basement emissions through its stack exhausts (Scenario I) are
given in Appendix 3.18a
– Appendix 3.18h. All scenarios were modelled to determine the worst
case effects.
By adopting the
traffic forecast in 2020, the emission rates for the combination of Scenario I
and Scenario 1 are also estimated, as presented
in Appendix
3.19. Based on the comparison of
the modeling results for all eight combinations of Scenarios I & II with
Scenarios 1-4 for the worst case year of 2015, the results for different
combinations differ by a small amount (less than 2%) and yet the combination of
Scenario I with Scenario 1 tends to give relatively more conservative
results. Therefore, this combination has
been used to estimate the emission rates for year 2020, which are then used to
refine the NO2 modelling results for those planned ASRs that will be
in operation from 2020 onwards (see Section
14.3.5.2).
EMFAC-HKV2.5.1 model results and the traffic
modelling data from the Traffic Consultants were used to generate the inputs
for use in ISCST3.
The portal emissions are modelled according
to EPD’s Guidelines on Choice of Models
and Model Parameters, which recommends portals and similar openings are
modelled as volume sources according to the
Model Description – CALINE4
CALINE4 is a line source air quality model developed by the California Department of Transportation and is one of the models prescribed by the EPD Guidelines on Choice of Models and Model Parameters. It is based on the Gaussian diffusion equation and employs a mixing zone concept to characterise pollutant dispersion over the roadway.
The purpose of the model is to assess air quality impacts near transportation facilities. Given source strength, meteorology and site geometry, CALINE4 can predict pollutant concentrations for receptors located within 500 m of a given roadway. As with all Gaussian models, CALINE4 has some limitations, as described in Section 14.3.4.1.
Assumptions and Inputs – CALINE4
The predicted traffic flows have taken into
account the development of the four concurrent projects, namely: Road Works at
Hourly meteorological data for a full year as extracted from the PATH model released by EPD in December 2012 (meteorological data year 2010, grid 28, 27) has been adopted for use in CALINE4. The data is considered to be the most up to date data available. PATH data has been observed to have a lower mixing height for some hours, when compared to the measured mixing height. The minimum mixing height recorded by HKO in 2010 is 121.3 m, whereas the PATH minimum mixing height is 40 m. The HKO minimum mixing height of 121.3 m is used to replace any PATH mixing height below this value. This approach is considered appropriate as it will minimise over-estimation due to lower mixing heights and also will minimise under-estimation due to high stacks being excluded in the mixing volume. The PATH data with the above modification is considered to be representative of the site wind data at the underpass road site.. A roughness coefficient of 370cm is used, as the area is considered to be urban.
Based on the worst case emission factors and the 24-hour traffic flow in 2015, the composite fleet emission factors have been calculated for the road links, as detailed in Appendix 3.23.
By adopting the traffic forecast in 2020, the composite fleet emission factors have also been calculated for the road links, as detailed in Appendix 3.24. These emission factors have been used to refine the NO2 modelling results for those planned ASRs that will be in operation from 2020 onwards (see Section 14.3.5.2).
14.3.4.3 Operation
Phase – Marine Emissions
Introduction
To assess the operational air quality from
marine sources ISCST3 was used to predict the cumulative NOx, RSP
and SO2 levels at the identified ASRs in accordance with the EPD’s Guidelines on Choice of Models and Model
Parameters,
Marine emissions considered to be important for the assessment are: fast ferry traffic movements, based on scheduled sailings at the China Ferry Terminal; cargo-handling vessel traffic movements along the Yau Ma Tei Fairway at the western edge waterfront of the WKCD site; derrick lighter barges operating at the New Yau Ma Tei Public Cargo Working Area (NYPCWA), and; ocean cruise ship emissions at berth at the Ocean Terminal. As the marine emissions are all from existing marine activities within the surrounding waters and the WKCD development itself does not contribute to any marine traffic emissions, the cumulative SO2 levels due to the various surrounding sources are assessed for the proposed ASRs within the WKCD site only. ISCST3 has been used to predict the air pollutant concentrations due to marine sources. The locations of all such pollution sources are as shown in Figure 3.7. Details of the emissions rates for individual sources are given in Appendix 3.25.
PATH was used to predict the current background air pollution for year 2015 due to sources outside the project boundary. Sources include, but are not limited to, the Pearl River Deltas Economic Zone (PRDEZ), the Hong Kong International Airport, power plants in HKSAR and roads beyond the WKCD, and long range marine emissions.
The cumulative hourly maximum NOx,
RSP and SO2 concentrations are predicted by the above models by
using the corresponding MM5 hourly meteorological data in 2010 as extracted
from the PATH model released by EPD in December 2012.
Model Description – ISCST3
Gaussian
model ISCST3 has been used for modelling potential impacts from the
above-mentioned nearby marine emission sources. Refer to Section 14.3.4.2.
Assumptions and Inputs
The operational sources for the ISCST3 modelling (shown in Figure 3.7) include:
¡ Fast ferry traffic movements, based on scheduled sailings, of up to 170 daily movements (ferry going to is one movement, ferry leaving is a second movement) at the China Ferry Terminal;
¡ Tugs associated with derrick lighter barge movements in the NYMTTS;
¡ Derrick lighter barges operating at the New Yau Ma Tei Public Cargo Working Area (NYPCWA), and;
¡ Ocean Cruise Ship movements at the Ocean Terminal.
Hourly meteorological data for a full year as extracted from the PATH model released by EPD in December 2012 (meteorological data year 2010, grid 28, 27) has been adopted for use in CALINE4. The data is considered to be the most up to date data available. PATH data has been observed to have a lower mixing height for some hours, when compared to the measured mixing height. The minimum mixing height recorded by HKO in 2010 is 121.3 m, whereas the PATH minimum mixing height is 40 m. The HKO minimum mixing height of 121.3 m is used to replace any PATH mixing height below this value. This approach is considered appropriate as it will minimise over-estimation due to lower mixing heights and also will minimise under-estimation due to high stacks being excluded in the mixing volume. The PATH data with the above modification is considered to be representative of the site wind data at underpass site.
New Yau Ma Tei Public Cargo Working Area (NYPCWA)
The NYPCWA is located on the north-south
shoreline of the NYMTTS to the north of WKCD. The area is mainly used for
loading and unloading cargo from derrick lighter barges. The shoreline is
approximately 1,250 metres long. According to the Merchant Shipping (Local Vessels) (Typhoon Shelters) Regulation –
Chapter 548E the maximum permitted length for local vessels in the typhoon
shelter is 50 metres. For manoeuvring purposes it was assumed that each vessel
would need 5 metres at bow and stern. The maximum number of vessels operating
at any one time was therefore assumed to be the shoreline length divided by
vessel and manoeuvring length, which gives 20 vessels. Although this does not
take into account a larger possible vessel density should smaller barges being
used, it is still considered realistic estimate, as a visual survey identified
a similar number of vessels along the shore front.
The emission rates were estimated with
reference to the USEPA Non-Road Diesel
Standards and USEPA Current
Methodologies in Preparing Mobile Source Port-Related Emission Inventories
(April 2009), hereafter referred to as “USEPA
Methodology”. The barges were assumed to have an engine size of 314.6 kW, which is
based on average engine size information from 250 ton cranes. Based on the maximum
theoretical loading factor of 43% for gantry cranes (Starcrest Consulting
Group, LLC, 2009. Rubber Tired
Gantry (RTG) Crane Load Factor Study), a loading factor of 50%, which is
considered to be conservative, is assumed for the barges. A visual survey
showed the derrick lighters operate approximately 5 minutes out of every 20
minutes, with an on-off sequence of: rigging – 10 minutes; crane operation – 5
minutes; unrigging – 5 minutes. Therefore all engines are assumed to be
operating at 50% load and for 25% of the operation hours.
Marine diesel engines are assumed to have an
average operating lifetime of 10,000 hours. Derrick lighter barges are assumed
to operate during the same period as the NYPCWA, i.e., 7:00 am to
9:00 pm daily or 14 hours per day (Monday to Saturday), with a time-in
mode of 25%. Based on these assumptions, it can be estimated that the average
life span of the marine engine on a derrick lighter barge is approximately 10
years, which is used to
determine the emission rate for the
engines by making reference to the emission
standards for non-road diesel engines.
This
estimated engine life span is considered to give a conservative emission rate as the average age of engines is likely to
be less
than 10 years. Based on a visual survey, the exhaust height of the derrick lighter
engine is assumed to be 8.7m (approximately the height of three shipping containers).
Details of estimating the engine emission can be found in Appendix 3.25.
Information provided by the marine
sub-consultant estimates 130 small craft movements per day in the NYMTTS (both
entering and leaving). It is assumed that all the vessels are tugs and are
restricted to the same operation period as the NYPCWA, that
is 7:00 am to 9:00 pm daily.
The NOx emission rates for tugs
were estimated by actual engine data sourced from maritime sales information.
RSP emission rates are based on Harbour Craft Emission Factors as published in the
“USEPA Methodology”. SO2
emission rates were estimated from the Starcrest
Consulting Group, LLC
Engine loading factor for tugs was assumed
to be 31% as described in the “USEPA
Methodology”. The movements were divided evenly among the operating hours
and so for modelling purposes there are nine tug movements per operating hour
of NYPCWA.
As the tugs are moving, the emissions are
modelled as a series of area sources. To allow for variation in the actual
vessel route, a width of 30 m is applied. The average hourly area emission
rate was calculated by the instantaneous emission rate (g/s) multiplied by the time
that it takes for the vessel to move over the length of the route (based on the
reported average speed), and then divided by the total route area and
3600 seconds (one hour).
The estimated emission rates are summarised
in Table
14.3.12 and details of the estimation are
given in Appendix 3.25.
Table 14.3.12: Estimated Emission Rates of Barges at NYPCWA
Pollutant |
Vessel type |
Estimated Emission Rates |
NOx |
Barge |
0.0799 g/s for each barge |
|
Tug |
2.30 x 10-6 g/m2.s for each tug |
RSP |
Barge |
0.0022 g/s for each barge |
|
Tug |
8.81 x 10-8 g/m2.s for each tug |
SO2 |
Barge |
0.0136 g/s for each barge |
|
Tug |
6.07 x 10-7 g/m2.s for each tug |
The China Ferry Terminal is located to the south-east of WKCD. Three
main companies operate at the Terminal, which are: CotaiJet, TurboJet and Chu
Kong Passenger Transport Limited. Sailing timetables were reviewed for each of
the companies and total vessel unloading/loading to the terminal calculated.
The total unloading/loading was from one to 14 vessels per hour, between the
hours of 7:00am and 11:00pm. Outside of these hours there are no scheduled
ferry services and therefore no emissions modelled.
The
emission rates were calculated based on the “Institute for the Environment, The
From
information available from ferry operators, the exhausts were assumed to emit
at water level, as no stack was visible for the majority of the ferries
surveyed, and stacks for fast ferries are horizontal. To account for this exhaust position, the
stacks were modelled with an efflux velocity of 0.001 m/s and an
equivalent stack diameter. This approach is as described in Section 6.1 of the USEPA AERMOD Implementation Guide, 2009 and
is considered conservative.
Emissions for the
movement of fast ferries to and from the terminal were also modelled. Separate emission
factors were calculated for Macau ferries (i.e., fast ferries travelling
to/from Macau) and
For
As the marine traffic emissions are included
as part of the emission inventory of the PATH model, there is a certain amount
of double counting. The modelling results for the fast ferries are therefore
considered to be conservative.
Table
14.3.13: Estimated
Emission Rates of Fast Ferries at
Pollutant |
Mode |
Estimated Emission Rates |
NOx |
Berth |
0.12 g/s for each ferry* |
|
|
8.84 x 10-6 g/m2.s for each ferry |
|
|
1.01 x 10-5 g/m2.s for each ferry |
RSP |
Berth |
0.004 g/s for each ferry* |
|
|
2.79 x 10-7 g/m2.s for each ferry |
|
|
3.21 x 10-7 g/m2.s for each ferry |
SO2 |
Berth |
0.026 g/s for each ferry* |
|
|
1.88 x 10-6 g/m2.s for each ferry |
|
|
2.15 x 10-6 g/m2.s for each ferry |
*Assumed to last for 30
minutes during each hour of operation
The Ocean Terminal is located to the south-east of WKCD. A 40,000-ton
ship is berthed at the Ocean Terminal during day-time but leaves for the sea
during the night-time. This 40,000-ship is hereafter referred to as the
day-time ship. Other cruise ships are also periodically berthed at the Ocean
Terminal. There are totally two berths available at the Ocean Terminal. Therefore,
it is assumed for the worst-case scenario that both the day-time ship and another
70,000-ton ship are berthed at the Terminal simultaneously with the 70,000-ton
ship berthing for 24 hours of a day (hereafter referred to as the 24-hour
ship). The day-time ship is generally berthed between about 8:00am and 8:00pm
and has been modelled as such. The 24-hour ship is assumed to be berthed for 24
hours at the Terminal, as when visiting it can be berthed at the Terminal for
more than a day. This modelling approach is considered to have captured the worst-case
scenario when both cruise ships are at the berths.
Emission rates of the ships berthing at the
Ocean Terminal were estimated by using the “USEPA
Methodology”, MARPOL regulations, as stated in Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Air Pollution) Regulation – Chapter
413M, Section 27 (3) (b) and engine information for the auxiliary engines.
No information was available as to whether the ship is to cold iron during
berth, so it is assumed all auxiliary engines are running for the entire time
the cruise ships are berthed at the Ocean Terminal. During berthing the cruise
ships would also be running auxiliary boilers to provide hot water, heating and
other services. These services would be provided by exhaust heat exchangers on
the main and auxiliary engines during cruising, however during berth the main
engines are off and therefore auxiliary boilers are needed Boiler emissions
were estimated based on the “HK Inventory”.
The fuel used during berthing is assumed to be residual oil, with a sulfur
content of 2.8%. This is conservative as some ocean going vessels use
distillate fuel, which has a lower sulfur content and
leads to lower RSP and SO2 emissions. The future projected average
fuel sulfur content is 1.98% for auxiliary engines and 2.07% for auxiliary
boilers, both of which are lower than the assumed 2.8% sulfur content. Moreover,
the MARPOL regulations will reduce the sulfur content to 0.5% from 2020
onwards.
To prevent over-estimation of the SO2 emissions from the ships berthing at the Ocean Terminal, a calibration exercise was performed with reference to the on-site SO2 data recorded at the EPD’s WKCD monitoring station (see Section 14.3.3.1). Historic berthing timetable at the Ocean Terminal during the monitoring period of the WKCD monitoring station (i.e., from Sep 2011 to Aug 2012) was identified. As there are many day-time marine traffic emission sources (e.g., Star Ferries, China ferries, Macau ferries, recreational and cargo vessels) during day-time, the calibration exercise was carried out only for night-tme periods between 9pm and 8am when the 24-hour ship alone is berthed at the Ocean Terminal (the day-time ship is at cruise during night-time) and the emissions from fast ferries and other marine traffic are minimal. The calibration results were then used to adjust the SO2 emission rate for the 24-hour ship to provide more realistic estimates of the maximum SO2 concentrations at the ASRs. The SO2 emission rate for the day-time ship, which is smaller in tonnage than the 24-hour ship, is conservatively assumed to be the same as the adjusted emission rate for the 24-hour ship. Details of the calibration results for estimation of SO2 emission rates are given in Appendix 3.25.
Based on a visual
survey and information on the day-time ship, the height of the stacks was
assumed to be 50 metres. Based on engine information, there are four
auxiliary engines for day-time ship, and it is therefore assumed there are four
stacks. The estimated emission rates of the ships are summarised in Table 14.3.14 and details of the estimation are given in Appendix
3.25. No
emissions for vessels sailing to and from the terminal were estimated or
modelled as this is considered to be adequately covered by the PATH model and
is outside the 500 m assessment area.
Table 14.3.14: Estimated Emission Rates of Cruise Ships at Ocean Terminal
Pollutant |
Vessel |
Estimated Emission Rates (g/s) |
NOx |
Day-time ship |
12.97 |
|
24-hour ship |
14.55 |
RSP |
Day-time ship |
1.88 |
|
24-hour ship |
1.97 |
SO2 |
Day-time ship |
7.62 |
|
24-hour ship |
7.62 |
14.3.4.4 Operation Phase – General Emissions
To assess the operational air quality, a
variety of models were required. In accordance with the EPD’s
Guidelines on Choice of Models and Model
Parameters.
Model Description - PATH
The PATH model is a numerical air quality
modelling system developed specifically for use in
Assumptions and Inputs – PATH
An updated version of PATH was released by
the EPD for general use in December 2012. As there is no significant policy
change or inventory update since the release of the latest PATH and the
submission of this report, use of the 2012 PATH model in its current state is
considered appropriate.
For EIA applications, PATH simulates wind field, pollutant emissions,
transportation and chemical transformation and outputs pollutant concentrations
over Hong Kong and the Pearl River Delta (PRD) region at a fine grid size of
1.5km.
During the 12th Hong Kong-Guangdong Joint Working Group
Meeting on Sustainable Development and Environmental Protection (Nov 2012), the
Hong Kong and Guangdong Governments jointly endorsed a Major Air Pollutant
Emission Reduction Plan for the Pearl River Delta Region up to year 2020. A
comprehensive emission inventory for
Table 14.3.15: Summary of 2015 and 2020 Hong Kong Emission Inventory for the PATH Model
Pollutant |
Total Emission in 2015
(ton/year) |
Total Emission in 2020
(ton/year) |
SO2 |
26,625 |
23,075 |
NOx |
98,100 |
87,200 |
RSP |
5,706 |
5,389 |
PATH model was used to quantify the background air
quality during the operational phase of the Project. Emission sources including
roads, marine, airports, power plants and industries within the Pearl River
Delta Economic Zone and Hong Kong were considered in the PATH model. Details of
the PATH Model and related emission inventory can be found in EPD’s web site.
The hourly SO2, NOx and RSP
concentrations as extracted from the PATH for year 2015 are adopted as the
background air pollutant concentrations in the estimation of cumulative impact for
the Project during the worst case year of 2015. The hourly pollutant concentrations as
extracted from the PATH for year 2020 have also been used to refine the NO2
modelling results for those planned ASRs that will be in operation from 2020
onwards (see Section 14.3.5.2).
Since the vehicular and marine traffic emissions
at local scale (i.e. within the 500m assessment area) have been modeled by
near-field dispersion models, namely, CALINE4 and ISCST (see Sections 14.3.4.2 and 14.3.4.3), adding the PATH background
concentrations to the near-field modeling results would lead to certain amount of
double counting, and hence conservative cumulative modeling results.
Other Assumptions
According to Entec UK Limited: Defra
The Ozone Limiting Method (OLM) as described
in EPD’s Guidelines on Choice of Models and Model Parameters has been adopted to estimate the conversion
of NOx to NO2 from both marine and vehicular emissions.
The ozone concentrations are based on the future hourly background ozone
concentrations, for year 2015 or 2020 which were extracted from grid (28, 27)
of the most up to date PATH. Grid (28, 27) of the PATH model is used because
the majority of the WKCD area falls within this grid (see Figure 3.8).
The NOx/NO2 conversion
for vehicular and marine emissions is therefore estimated as follows:
[NO2] =
0.075 x [NOx]vehicle + minimum
of {0.925 x [NOx]vehicle or (46/48) x [O3]PATH}
+ 0.10 x [NOx]marine + minimum
of {0.90 x [NOx]marine or (46/48) x [O3]PATH}
where
¡ [NO2] is the estimated hourly vehicular
NO2 concentration (predicted by CALINE4 and ISCST);
¡ [NOx]vehicle
is the hourly NOx
concentration as predicted by CALINE4 and ISCST3 for vehicular emissions at the receptor;
¡ [O3]PATH is the hourly ozone
concentrations as extracted from the aforementioned grid of the PATH model for year 2015 or 2020, and;
¡ [NOx]marine
is the hourly NOx
concentration as predicted by ISCST3 for marine emissions at the receptor;
To estimate the total hourly concentrations,
the hourly pollutant concentrations as predicted by CALINE4 and ISCST3
(vehicular and marine) are added together with the future hourly background
pollutant concentrations as extracted from the relevant grid of the PATH model.
Therefore, the total hourly concentrations of NO2 are calculated as
follows:
[NO2]total = [NO2] + [NO2]PATH
where
¡ [NO2]total
is the total hourly NO2
concentration;
¡ [NO2] is the hourly vehicular
and marine NO2 concentration which is first predicted by CALINE4 and ISCST3 as NOx
and then converted to NO2 by using OLM; and
[NO2]PATH
is the hourly NO2
concentrations as extracted from the aforementioned grid of the PATH model for
year 2015
or 2020.
Similarly, the total hourly RSP (vehicular
and marine) and SO2 (marine emissions only) concentrations are also
calculated by adding together the hourly results predicted by CALINE4, ISCST3
and PATH.
With the total hourly NO2, RSP
and SO2 estimated, the daily results are obtained by taking the
arithmetic mean of the 24 hourly results. Similarly, the annual concentrations
are calculated as the arithmetic mean of the whole year of hourly results.
14.3.5 Evaluation and Assessment of the Air Quality Impacts
Construction Phase Tier 1 Results
The Tier 1 screening results for mitigated and unmitigated scenarios including the background contribution are tabulated in Appendix 3.28. The unmitigated and mitigated results are summarised as follows.
Hourly
The Tier 1 hourly TSP results under both unmitigated and mitigated scenarios are summarized in Table 14.3.16. There would be exceedances of the hourly TSP limit of 500 µg/m3 under the Tier 1 unmitigated scenario from 2014 to 2017. However, under the Tier 1 mitigated scenario, exceedances of the hourly TSP limit would only occur from 2015 to 2017, but no exceedances in 2014.
The locations of the dust sources are shown in Figures 3.3a to 3.3k. Figures 3.11a to 3.11h and 3.12a to 3.12h show the Tier 1 hourly TSP concentration contours for unmitigated and mitigated scenarios, respectively.
Table 14.3.16: Summary of Predicted Cumulative Hourly Average TSP Concentrations for All ASRs (Tier 1 Unmitigated & Mitigated)
Year |
Tier 1
Unmitigated Scenario Range of Maximum Hourly TSP (μg/m3) [Criterion - 500 µg/m3] |
Tier 1
Mitigated Scenario Range of Maximum Hourly TSP (μg/m3) [Criterion - 500 µg/m3] |
2014 |
97 – 1992 |
75 – 420 |
2015 |
150 – 4731 |
79 – 580 |
2016 |
175 – 5296 |
79 – 623 |
2017 |
203 – 5108 |
81 – 543 |
Table 14.3.17 shows the receptors that would breach the hourly TSP limit of 500 µg/m3 under the Tier 1 mitigated scenario for years 2015 to 2017. ASRs that were predicted to exceed the hourly TSP limit of 500 µg/m3 for the Tier 1 mitigated scenario were modelled further under Tier 2 conditions, as described in Section 14.3.4.1.
Table 14.3.17: Predicted Cumulative Hourly Average TSP Concentrations for ASRs with Exceedance (Tier 1 Mitigated)
ASR |
Height above ground (m) |
Maximum Hourly TSP (μg/m3) [Criterion - 500 µg/m3] |
Remark |
2015 |
|||
P01d-1 |
4 |
580 |
Planned Performance Art
Venues within WKCD. It is a possible fresh air intake. Exceedance subject to
Tier 2 assessment. |
P53-1 |
4 |
575 |
Planned Performance Art
Venues within WKCD. It is a possible open area. Exceedance subject to
Tier 2 assessment. |
2016 |
|||
P01a-1 |
4 |
534 |
Planned Performance Art
Venues within WKCD. It is a possible fresh air intake. Exceedance subject to
Tier 2 assessment. |
P01b-1 |
4 |
550 |
Planned Performance Art
Venues within WKCD. It is a possible fresh air intake. Exceedance subject to
Tier 2 assessment. |
P01c-1 |
4 |
616 |
Planned Performance Art
Venues within WKCD. It is a possible fresh air intake. Exceedance subject to
Tier 2 assessment. |
P53-1 |
4 |
623 |
Planned Performance Art
Venues within WKCD. It is a possible open area. Exceedance subject to
Tier 2 assessment. |
2017 |
|||
P52-1 |
4 |
543 |
Planned Performance Art
Venues within WKCD. It is a possible open area. Exceedance subject to
Tier 2 assessment |
Daily
The daily TSP results for Tier 1 unmitigated and mitigated scenario including the background contribution are tabulated in Appendix 3.28. Table 14.3.18 summarises the Tier 1 results for daily TSP under both unmitigated and mitigated scenarios. There would be exceedances of the daily TSP limit of 260 µg/m3 under the Tier 1 unmitigated scenario from 2014 to 2017. However, under the Tier 1 mitigated scenario, no ASRs are predicted to exceed the daily TSP limit for any of the assessment years.
The locations of the dust sources are shown in Figures 3.3a to 3.3k. Figures 3.13a to 3.13h and Figures 3.14a to 3.14h show the daily TSP concentration contours for unmitigated and mitigated scenarios, respectively.
Table 14.3.18: Summary of Predicted Cumulative Daily Average TSP Concentrations for All ASRs (Tier 1 Unmitigated & Mitigated)
Year |
Tier 1
Unmitigated Scenario Range of Maximum Daily TSP (μg/m3) [Criterion - 260 µg/m3] |
Tier 1
Mitigated Scenario Range of Maximum Daily TSP (μg/m3) [Criterion - 260 µg/m3] |
2014 |
74 – 433 |
69 –132 |
2015 |
80 – 1110 |
70 – 223 |
2016 |
86 –1844 |
70 – 257 |
2017 |
84 –1278 |
70 – 204 |
Construction Phase Tier 2 Results
The Tier 2 results including the background contribution, as described in Section 14.3.4.1, are tabulated in Appendix 3.29, and are discussed below.
Hourly
Tier
2 scenario was performed for those ASR subject to exceedance of the hourly TSP
limit under the Tier 1 mitigated scenario. Under the Tier 2 mitigated scenario no
ASRs were subject to exceedance of the hourly TSP limit of
500 µg/m³, as summarised in Table 14.3.19. Detailed results can be
found in Appendix 3.29. The locations of the dust sources are shown in Figures 3.3a to 3.3k. Figures 3.15a to 3.15e show the hourly TSP concentration contours under the Tier 2 mitigated scenario.
Table 14.3.19: Summary of Predicted Cumulative Hourly Average TSP Concentrations (Tier 2 Mitigated)
ASR |
Height above ground (m) |
Maximum Hourly TSP (μg/m3) [Criterion - 500 µg/m3] |
2015 |
|
|
P01d-1 |
4 |
406 |
P53-1 |
4 |
265 |
2016 |
|
|
P01a-1 |
4 |
343 |
P01b-1 |
4 |
374 |
P01c-1 |
4 |
438 |
P53-1 |
4 |
413 |
2017 |
|
|
P52-1 |
4 |
247 |
Daily
There are no ASRs that would be subject to exceedance of the daily TSP limit under the Tier 1 mitigated scenario. Therefore, it is not necessary to run the Tier 2 mitigated scenario for daily TSP.
Construction Phase Annual Results
The annual results for mitigated and unmitigated scenarios including the background contribution are tabulated in Appendix 3.30 and are also summarised in Table 14.3.20. There would be exceedances of the annual TSP limit of 80 µg/m3 under the unmitigated scenario for years 2014 and 2016 only. However, under the mitigated scenario, no ASRs would exceed the annual TSP limit for any of the assessment years.
The
locations of the dust sources are shown in Figures 3.3a
to 3.3k. Figures 3.17a to 3.17h and Figures 3.18a
to 3.18h show the annual TSP
concentration contours for unmitigated and mitigated scenarios, respectively.
Table 14.3.20: Summary of Predicted Cumulative Annual Average TSP Concentrations for All ASRs (Unmitigated & Mitigated)
Year |
Unmitigated
Scenario Range of Maximum Annual TSP (μg/m3) [Criterion - 80 µg/m3] |
Mitigated
Scenario Range of Maximum Annual TSP (μg/m3) [Criterion - 80 µg/m3] |
2014 |
69 - 81 |
68 - 75 |
2015 |
68 - 79 |
68 - 79 |
2016 |
69 - 84 |
68 - 78 |
2017 |
68 - 79 |
68 - 71 |
14.3.5.2
Operation
Phase – Vehicular and Marine Emissions
The predicted air quality results have
included the background pollutant levels as extracted from the PATH model for
year 2015 based on the latest released model and the cumulative impacts of the
following emissions:
¡ Existing and proposed open roads within the 500 m assessment area;
¡ Proposed underpasses/landscape decks along the Austin Road West and Lin Cheung Road and the associated top openings under the Road Works at West Kowloon project;
¡ Existing WHC portal in the vicinity of the WKCD site;
¡ Ventilation exhausts/portals serving the planned underground roads within the WKCD area;
¡ Emissions from stationary marine sources at NYPCWA, China Ferry Terminal and Ocean Terminal, and;
¡ Fast ferry and tug movements within the 500 m assessment area.
Comparison of the predicted cumulative NO2,
RSP and SO2 concentrations and any exceedances for individual ASRs
under all modelled scenarios during the worst case year of 2015 (see Sections 14.3.4.2) can be found in Appendix 3.31. For the planned ASRs that will only be in
operation in or after 2020, however, the modelling results that are based on
the worst case year of 2015 with the highest total road traffic emissions would
be overly conservative because those planned ASRs are yet to exist in 2015. As a result, the relevant modelling works for
road traffic emissions have been refined for such planned ASRs by adopting the
traffic forecast in 2020 and the background concentrations as extracted from
the PATH for year 2020 in order to obtain more realistic estimates of the
predicted maximum cumulative NO2 levels. Details of the modelling results using the
traffic forecast and background concentrations in 2020 are given in Appendix 3.32. The contours for cumulative NO2, SO2 and RSP at
1.5m, 12m, 40m, 50m and 60m above ground are shown in Figure 3.19 to Figure 3.93.
According to the modelling
results as summarised in Table 14.3.21,
all the ASRs would be in compliance with the corresponding AQOs for daily and
annual RSP; for hourly, daily and annual SO2; as well as for hourly,
daily and annual NO2.
However, the predicted maximum hourly or daily NO2
concentrations at some of the ASRs would exceed the corresponding AQO for up to
once per year, which is within the allowable numbers of exceedance for hourly
NO2 (3 times per year) and for daily NO2 (once per year).
Details of such hourly and daily NO2 exceedances, together with the
breakdown of NO2 contributions due to different sources, are
summarised in Table
14.3.22.
Table 14.3.21: Summary of Predicted Cumulative RSP, SO2 and NO2 Concentrations for All ASRs
Air
Pollutant |
Averaging
Time |
AQO (μg/m3) |
Allowable
Exceedances in a Year |
Range of
Maximum Concentrations (μg/m3) |
Maximum No.
of Exceedance in a Year |
RSP Note (1) |
24 hours |
180 |
1 |
114.5 – 117.7 |
0 |
1 year |
55 |
0 |
42.8 – 51.7 |
0 |
|
SO2 Note (1) |
1 hour |
800 |
3 |
84.7 – 619.1 |
0 |
24 hours |
350 |
1 |
31.5 – 89.0 |
0 |
|
1 year |
80 |
0 |
7.9 – 16.2 |
0 |
|
NO2 Note (2) |
1 hour |
300 |
3 |
259.7 – 314.9 |
0 – 1 |
24 hours |
150 |
1 |
108.0 – 150.3 |
0 – 1 |
|
1 year |
80 |
0 |
45.0 – 79.7 |
0 |
Notes:
(1)
The predicted SO2 and RSP concentrations for all existing and
planned ASRs are based on the traffic forecast during the worst-case year of
2015 and the background concentrations as extracted from the PATH for year
2015.
(2)
The predicted NO2 concentrations for existing ASRs and
planned ASRs that will
be in operation before 2020 are based on the traffic forecast
during the worst-case year of 2015 and the background concentrations as
extracted from the PATH for year 2015 whereas the predicted NO2
concentrations for planned ASRs that will be in operation in/after 2020 have
been refined based on the traffic forecast in 2020 and the background
concentrations as extracted from the PATH for year 2020.
From Table 14.3.22, four existing ASRs,
namely, WOB-1, VT1-23, SRT-1 and SRT-2, would be subject to exceedance of the
AQO for hourly NO2 for once a year, which is, however, below the
allowable number of exceedances (3 times per year). At two planned ASRs, namely, P09-1 and
P37-1, the cumulative maximum daily NO2 concentrations would
marginally exceed the AQO for daily NO2 by only 0.2 to 0.3 μg/m3 (about 0.1% to 0.2% of the AQO for daily NO2)
for once per year, which is still within the allowable number of exceedance
under the AQO for daily NO2 (once per year). Therefore, these four existing ASRs and two
planned ASRs would still be in compliance with the AQO for hourly NO2
and daily NO2 respectively. As
noted in Table 14.3.3, ASRs P09-1 and P37-1 are at 4m
above ground level, and are therefore assessment points for reference only but
not fresh air intake or openable window locations.
It can also be seen from Table 14.3.22 that majority (some 78%-81%) of the hourly/daily
NO2 concentrations would be from the background concentration and
the remaining 19%-22% would be due to nearby marine traffic/vessel plus road
traffic emissions. Of these 19%-22% contributions, the percentage contributions
from nearby road traffic emissions for the four existing ASRs would be around
6%-12%, which are lower than the corresponding percentages (some 18%-19%) for
the two planned ASRs. As the underpass
road project would only contribute to some road traffic emissions, the underpass
road project is not the key contributor to the exceedance of hourly or daily NO2
limits (only once in a year) at the six ASRs.
Table 14.3.22: Breakdown
of Predicted Cumulative NO2 Concentrations
by Sources for ASRs with Potential Exceedance
ASR |
Height
above ground (m) |
Description |
Maximum Cumulative Hourly/Daily NO2
Concentrations (μg/m3)* |
||||||
|
Background
Contribution |
Marine
Traffic Contribution |
Road
Traffic Contribution |
Total
Concentration# |
|||||
Hourly NO2 (AQO: 300 μg/m3, not to be exceeded for more than 3
times per year) |
|||||||||
WOB-1 |
6.8 |
Wing On
Building – Block A Residential (Existing ASR) |
246.2 |
80.6% |
39.6 |
13.0% |
19.6 |
6.4% |
305.4 [1] |
VT1-23 |
8 |
The Victoria
Towers – Tower 1 Residential (Existing ASR) |
246.2 |
80.3% |
41.6 |
13.6% |
18.7 |
6.1% |
306.5 [1] |
SRT-1 |
19 |
Sorrento – Tower 1 Residential (Existing ASR) |
246.2 |
78.2% |
30.0 |
9.5% |
38.7 |
12.3% |
314.9 [1] |
SRT-2 |
23 |
246.2 |
81.1% |
29.9 |
9.8% |
27.6 |
9.1% |
303.7 [1] |
|
Daily NO2 (AQO: 150 μg/m3, not to be exceeded for more than
once per year) |
|||||||||
P09-1 |
4 |
Office/
Residential (Planned from 2017
onwards) |
118.9 |
79.1% |
2.2 |
1.5% |
29.2 |
19.4% |
150.3 [1] |
P37-1 |
4 |
Retail/
Dining/ Entertainment (Planned
from 2017 onwards) |
118.9 |
79.2% |
3.7 |
2.5% |
27.6 |
18.4% |
150.2 [1] |
*Percentages in shaded cells represent the percentage
share of the total concentrations.
#Numbers in bracket
refer to the numbers of exceedance per year.
As explained in Sections 14.3.3.3 and
14.3.3.4, majority of the vehicular emission sources and all marine
emission sources are due to respectively the nearby current/planned road
networks serving the West Kowloon area and the existing marine activities in
the surrounding waters, but not due to the WKCD development itself. To illustrate this, breakdown of the
predicted maximum hourly NO2 contributions due to different sources
has been identified at a number of selected ASRs during the worst case year of
2015, as presented in Table
14.3.23.
These selected
ASRs cover existing ASRs close to but outside the WKCD boundary and planned
ASRs representing the various types of future developments (to be operated
before 2020) scattering within the entire WKCD area. It can be seen from the Table that 88%-100%
of NO2 contributions would be due to the background concentration
plus the surrounding marine traffic emissions, with 12% or less from the nearby
road traffic emissions. As the underpass
road project would only result in some road traffic emissions, the underpass
road project itself would have very minor contribution to the predicted air
quality impacts at the ASRs.
Table 14.3.23: Breakdown of Predicted Cumulative Hourly NO2 Concentrations by Sources for Selected ASRs (for the Worst Case Year of 2015)
ASR |
Height above ground (m) |
Description |
Maximum
Cumulative Hourly NO2 Concentrations (μg/m3)* (AQO: 300 μg/m3, not to be exceeded for more than 3 times per
year) |
|||||||
|
Background Contribution |
Marine Traffic Contribution |
Road Traffic Contribution |
Total Concentration# |
||||||
WOB-1 |
6.8 |
Wing On
Building – Block A Residential (Existing ASR) |
246.2 |
80.6% |
39.6 |
13.0% |
19.6 |
6.4% |
305.4 [1] |
|
VT1-23 |
8 |
The Victoria
Towers – Tower 1 Residential (Existing ASR) |
246.2 |
80.3% |
41.6 |
13.6% |
18.7 |
6.1% |
306.5 [1] |
|
SRT-1 |
19 |
Sorrento – Tower 1 Residential (Existing ASR) |
246.2 |
78.2% |
30.0 |
9.5% |
38.7 |
12.3% |
314.9 [1] |
|
SRT-2 |
23 |
246.2 |
81.1% |
29.9 |
9.8% |
27.6 |
9.1% |
303.7 [1] |
||
P01a-1 |
4 |
Planned performance art venue (Planned ASR from 2015 onwards) |
246.2 |
86.0% |
40.0 |
14.0% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
286.3 |
|
P01a-3 |
12 |
246.2 |
86.1% |
39.9 |
13.9% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
286.1 |
||
P01a-5 |
20 |
246.2 |
86.1% |
39.7 |
13.9% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
285.9 |
||
P01a-7 |
40 |
246.2 |
87.5% |
35.2 |
12.5% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
281.4 |
||
P09-1 |
4 |
Office/ Residential (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
246.2 |
87.3% |
35.9 |
12.7% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
282.1 |
|
P09-3 |
12 |
246.2 |
87.5% |
35.2 |
12.5% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
281.4 |
||
P09-5 |
20 |
246.2 |
87.9% |
33.8 |
12.1% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
280.0 |
||
P09-7 |
40 |
277.2 |
99.2% |
2.2 |
0.8% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
279.4 |
||
P10-1 |
4 |
Office +
Retail/ Dining/ Entertainment Residential (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
246.2 |
85.8% |
40.9 |
14.2% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
287.1 |
|
P10-3 |
12 |
246.2 |
85.8% |
40.8 |
14.2% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
287.0 |
||
P10-5 |
20 |
246.2 |
85.9% |
40.5 |
14.1% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
286.7 |
||
P10-8 |
50 |
246.2 |
88.1% |
33.4 |
11.9% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
279.6 |
||
P16-1 |
4 |
Retail/
Dining/ Entertainment Residential (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
277.2 |
99.4% |
1.8 |
0.6% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
279.0 |
|
P16-3 |
12 |
277.2 |
99.4% |
1.7 |
0.6% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
278.9 |
||
P16-5 |
20 |
277.2 |
99.4% |
1.7 |
0.6% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
278.9 |
||
P16-8 |
50 |
277.2 |
99.5% |
1.3 |
0.5% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
278.5 |
||
P29-1 |
4 |
Office +
Retail/ Dining/ Entertainment Residential (Planned ASR from 2018 onwards) |
277.2 |
99.8% |
0.5 |
0.2% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
277.8 |
|
P29-3 |
12 |
277.2 |
99.8% |
0.5 |
0.2% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
277.7 |
||
P29-5 |
20 |
277.2 |
99.8% |
0.5 |
0.2% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
277.7 |
||
P29-10 |
70 |
277.2 |
99.9% |
0.4 |
0.1% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
277.6 |
||
P35c-1 |
4 |
Planned performance art venue (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
277.2 |
99.6% |
1.1 |
0.4% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
278.3 |
|
P35c-3 |
12 |
277.2 |
99.6% |
1.1 |
0.4% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
278.3 |
||
P35c-5 |
20 |
277.2 |
99.6% |
1.1 |
0.4% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
278.3 |
||
P37-1 |
4 |
Retail/
Dining/ Entertainment (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
246.2 |
88.1% |
6.7 |
2.4% |
26.6 |
9.5% |
279.5 |
|
P37-3 |
12 |
277.2 |
99.6% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
1.0 |
0.4% |
278.3 |
||
P37-5 |
20 |
277.2 |
99.7% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
0.8 |
0.3% |
278.1 |
||
P37-10 |
70 |
277.2 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
277.2 |
||
P51-1 |
4 |
Freespace (Planned ASR from 2016 onwards) |
277.2 |
99.9% |
0.2 |
0.1% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
277.4 |
|
P51-3 |
12 |
277.2 |
99.9% |
0.2 |
0.1% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
277.4 |
||
P51-5 |
20 |
277.2 |
99.9% |
0.2 |
0.1% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
277.4 |
||
P52-1 |
4 |
Pavilion (Planned ASR from 2016 onwards) |
277.2 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
277.2 |
|
P52-3 |
12 |
277.2 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
277.2 |
||
P52-5 |
20 |
277.2 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
277.2 |
||
OP |
1.5 |
Open Space (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
277.2 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
277.2 |
|
*Percentages in shaded cells represent the percentage
share of the total concentrations.
#Numbers in bracket
refer to the numbers of exceedance per year.
To illustrate the predicted air quality impacts in 2020, breakdown of
the predicted maximum hourly NO2 contributions due to different
sources has also been identified by adopting the traffic forecast and
background concentrations for the year of 2020 at selected ASRs, as presented in Table 14.3.24. The selected ASRs cover existing ASRs close
to but outside the WKCD boundary and planned ASRs representing the future
developments within WKCD, particularly those in the vicinity of the WHC portal. It can be seen from the Table that 73%-100%
of NO2 contributions would be due to the background concentration
plus the surrounding marine traffic emissions, with 27% or less from the nearby
road traffic emissions. The NO2
contributions from nearby road traffic for P43d and P43e at not more than 12m
above ground (21%-27%) are much higher than those for other ASRs (0.0%-8.9%),
chiefly because of their proximity to the WHC portal. Another observation is
that the cumulative maximum hourly NO2 concentrations of the existing
ASRs in 2020 would be considerably lower than those in 2015 (i.e., Table 14.3.23),
indicating an appreciable extent of improvement in air quality from 2015 to
2020.
Table
14.3.24: Breakdown
of Predicted Cumulative Hourly NO2 Concentrations
by Sources for Selected ASRs (for Year 2020)
ASR |
Height above ground (m) |
Description |
Maximum
Cumulative Hourly NO2 Concentrations (μg/m3)* (AQO: 300 μg/m3, not to be exceeded for more than 3 times per
year) |
||||||
|
Background Contribution |
Marine Traffic Contribution |
Road Traffic Contribution |
Total Concentration |
|||||
WOB-1 |
6.8 |
Wing On
Building – Block A Residential (Existing ASR) |
259.7 |
97.1% |
4.9 |
1.8% |
2.9 |
1.1% |
267.5 |
VT1-23 |
8 |
The Victoria
Towers – Tower 1 Residential (Existing ASR) |
214.5 |
74.5% |
61.7 |
21.4% |
11.7 |
4.1% |
287.9 |
SRT-1 |
19 |
Sorrento – Tower 1 Residential (Existing ASR) |
214.5 |
79.9% |
30.0 |
11.2% |
23.8 |
8.9% |
268.3 |
SRT-2 |
23 |
259.7 |
98.8% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
3.1 |
1.2% |
262.8 |
|
P37-1 |
4 |
Retail/ Dining/
Entertainment (Planned ASR from 2017 onwards) |
259.7 |
98.8% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
3.0 |
1.1% |
262.8 |
P37-3 |
12 |
259.7 |
98.9% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
2.7 |
1.0% |
262.5 |
|
P37-5 |
20 |
259.7 |
99.0% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
2.4 |
0.9% |
262.2 |
|
P37-10 |
70 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P39-1 |
4 |
Office + Planned performance art venues (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
259.7 |
99.0% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
2.6 |
1.0% |
262.4 |
P39-3 |
12 |
259.7 |
99.4% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
1.5 |
0.6% |
261.3 |
|
P39-5 |
20 |
259.7 |
99.7% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
0.7 |
0.3% |
260.5 |
|
P39-10 |
70 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43a-1 |
4 |
Hotel + Retail/ Dining/ Entertainment (Planned ASR from 2020 onwards) |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
P43a-3 |
12 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43a-4 |
16 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43b-1 |
4 |
Ditto |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
P43b-3 |
12 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43b-5 |
20 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43c-1 |
4 |
Ditto |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
P43c-3 |
12 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43c-5 |
20 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43d-1 |
4 |
Ditto |
202.8 |
72.6% |
2.7 |
1.0% |
73.9 |
26.4% |
279.4 |
P43d-3 |
12 |
202.8 |
77.3% |
2.7 |
1.0% |
56.7 |
21.6% |
262.2 |
|
P43d-5 |
20 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43d-7 |
40 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43e-1 |
4 |
Ditto |
202.8 |
72.2% |
3.2 |
1.1% |
74.9 |
26.7% |
280.9 |
P43e-3 |
12 |
202.8 |
77.5% |
3.2 |
1.2% |
55.8 |
21.3% |
261.8 |
|
P43e-5 |
20 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43e-8 |
50 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43f-1 |
4 |
Ditto |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
P43f-3 |
12 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43f-5 |
20 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43f-8 |
50 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43g-1 |
4 |
Ditto |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
P43g-3 |
12 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43g-5 |
20 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43g-7 |
40 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43h-1 |
4 |
Ditto |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
259.8 |
P43h-3 |
12 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
259.8 |
|
P43h-5 |
20 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43h-7 |
40 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43i-1 |
4 |
Ditto |
259.7 |
99.9% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.2 |
0.1% |
259.9 |
P43i-3 |
12 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
259.8 |
|
P43i-5 |
20 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43i-6 |
30 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
259.7 |
|
P43j-1 |
4 |
Ditto |
259.7 |
99.9% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.3 |
0.1% |
260.0 |
P43j-3 |
12 |
259.7 |
99.9% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.2 |
0.1% |
259.9 |
|
P43j-5 |
20 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
259.8 |
|
P43k-1 |
4 |
Ditto |
259.7 |
99.9% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.3 |
0.1% |
260.0 |
P43k-3 |
12 |
259.7 |
99.9% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.2 |
0.1% |
259.9 |
|
P43k-4 |
16 |
259.7 |
100.0% |
0.0 |
0.0% |
0.1 |
0.0% |
259.8 |
*Percentages in shaded cells represent the percentage
share of the total concentrations.
14.3.6 Mitigation Measures
To ensure compliance with the TSP criteria during the construction phase, the relevant requirements stipulated in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation and EPD’s Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant) BPM 3/2(93) as well as the good practices for dust control should be implemented to reduce the dust impact. The dust control measures are detailed as follows:
Dust emissions could be suppressed by regular water spraying on site. In general, water spraying twice a day could reduce dust emission from active construction area by 50%. However, for this underpass road Project, more frequent water spraying, i.e., 12 times a day or once every one hour, is required for heavy construction activities at all active works area in order to achieve a higher dust suppression efficiency of 91.7% to reduce the dust impacts to acceptable levels. A watering intensity of 3.75 L/m2, 12 times a day or once every hour, is predicted to achieve 91.7% dust suppression efficiency. Detailed calculations can be found in Appendix 3.8. Heavy construction activities include construction of roads, drilling, ground excavation, cut and fill operations (i.e., earth moving), etc.
Best Practices for Dust Control
In addition to implementing the recommended dust control measures mentioned above, it is recommended that the relevant best practices for dust control as stipulated in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation should also be adopted to further reduce the construction dust impacts of the Project. These best practices include:
Good Site Management
¡ Good site management is important to help reducing potential air quality impact down to an acceptable level. As a general guide, the Contractor should maintain high standard of housekeeping to prevent emission of fugitive dust. Loading, unloading, handling and storage of raw materials, wastes or by-products should be carried out in a manner so as to minimise the release of visible dust emission. Any piles of materials accumulated on or around the work areas should be cleaned up regularly. Cleaning, repair and maintenance of all plant facilities within the work areas should be carried out in a manner minimising generation of fugitive dust emissions. The material should be handled properly to prevent fugitive dust emission before cleaning.
Disturbed Parts of the Roads
¡ Each and every main temporary access should be paved with concrete, bituminous hardcore materials or metal plates and kept clear of dusty materials; or
¡ Unpaved parts of the road should be sprayed with water or a dust suppression chemical so as to keep the entire road surface wet.
Exposed Earth
¡ Exposed earth should be properly treated by compaction, hydroseeding, vegetation planting or seating with latex, vinyl, bitumen within six months after the last construction activity on the site or part of the site where the exposed earth lies.
Loading, Unloading or Transfer of Dusty Materials
¡ All dusty materials should be sprayed with water immediately prior to any loading or transfer operation so as to keep the dusty material wet.
Debris Handling
¡ Any debris should be covered entirely by impervious sheeting or stored in a debris collection area sheltered on the top and the three sides.
¡ Before debris is dumped into a chute, water should be sprayed so that it remains wet when it is dumped.
Transport of Dusty Materials
¡ Vehicle used for transporting dusty materials/spoils should be covered with tarpaulin or similar material. The cover should extend over the edges of the sides and tailboards.
Wheel washing
¡ Vehicle wheel washing facilities should be provided at each construction site exit. Immediately before leaving the construction site, every vehicle should be washed to remove any dusty materials from its body and wheels.
Use of vehicles
¡ The speed of the trucks within the site should be controlled to about 10km/hour in order to reduce adverse dust impacts and secure the safe movement around the site.
¡ Immediately before leaving the construction site, every vehicle should be washed to remove any dusty materials from its body and wheels.
¡ Where a vehicle leaving the construction site is carrying a load of dusty materials, the load should be covered entirely by clean impervious sheeting to ensure that the dusty materials do not leak from the vehicle.
Site hoarding
¡ Where a site boundary adjoins a road, street, service lane or other area accessible to the public, hoarding of not less than 2.4m high from ground level should be provided along the entire length of that portion of the site boundary except for a site entrance or exit.
Best Practices for Concrete Batching Plant
It is recommended
that the relevant best practices for dust control as stipulated in the Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means
for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant) BPM 3/2 should also be adopted
to further reduce the construction dust impacts of the Project. These include:
Exhaust from Dust Arrestment Plant
¡ Wherever possible the final discharge point from particulate matter arrestment plant, where is not necessary to achieve dispersion from residual pollutants, should be at low level to minimise the effect on the local community in the case of abnormal emissions and to facilitate maintenance and inspection.
Emission Limits
¡ All emissions to air, other than steam or water vapour, shall be colourless and free from persistent mist or smoke
Engineering Design/Technical Requirements
¡ As a general guidance, the loading, unloading, handling and storage of fuel, raw materials, products, wastes or by-products should be carried out in a manner so as to prevent the release of visible dust and/or other noxious or offensive emissions
Detailed mitigation methods and guidance can be found in the
stand-alone EM&A Manual.
14.3.6.2 Operation Phase – Vehicular and Marine Emissions
Since it has been assessed that all the ASRs
would be in compliance with all the relevant AQOs for SO2, NO2
and RSP, no mitigation measures for vehicular or marine traffic emissions are
required during the operation phase.
14.3.7 Evaluation of Residual Impacts
It has been assessed that there would neither be exceedance of the hourly TSP limit under the Tier 2 mitigated scenario nor exceedance of the AQO for daily TSP under the Tier 1 mitigated scenario at any of the ASRs throughout the entire construction period. Similarly, no exceedance of the AQO for annual TSP was predicted at any of the ASRs for the entire construction period under the mitigated scenario. Hence no residual impacts are anticipated during the construction phase.
14.3.7.2
Operation
Phase – Vehicular and Marine Emissions
According to the modelling results, all the identified ASRs would be in
compliance with the corresponding AQO for hourly, daily and annual SO2;
for hourly, daily and annual NO2 as well as for daily and annual
RSP. However, during the worst case year of 2015, four
existing ASRs, namely, WOB-1, VT1-23, SRT-1 and SRT-2, would be subject to
exceedance of the AQO for hourly NO2 (i.e., 300 μg/m3) by about
3.7-14.9 μg/m3
(or about 1.2%-5.0% of the relevant AQO)
for once a year, and two planned ASRs, namely,
P09-1 and P37-1, would be subject to marginal exceedance of the AQO for daily NO2
(i.e., 150 μg/m3) by about 0.2-0.3 μg/m3 (or about 0.1%-0.2%
of the relevant AQO) for once a year. Since
the numbers of such hourly and daily NO2 exceedances are within the respective
allowable numbers of exceedances (3 times per year for hourly NO2
and once per year for daily NO2), the AQO for hourly and daily NO2
would still be complied with at the six ASRs.
Hence, no residual impacts are anticipated during the operation phase
due to vehicular and marine emissions.
14.3.8 Environmental Monitoring and Audit
Regular dust monitoring is considered necessary during the construction phase of the Project and regular site audits are also required to ensure the dust control measures are properly implemented. Details of the environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) programme will be presented in the stand-alone EM&A Manual.
Since it has been assessed that all the ASRs would be in compliance with all the relevant AQOs for SO2, NO2 and RSP, no residual air quality impacts due to vehicular or marine traffic emissions are anticipated. Therefore, no monitoring is considered necessary for vehicular or marine traffic emissions.
14.3.9 Conclusion
Construction Phase
With
implementation of the recommended mitigation measures as well as the relevant
control requirements as stipulated in the Air
Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation and EPD’s Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means
for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant) BPM 3/2(93), it has been
assessed that there would neither be exceedance of the hourly TSP limit under the Tier 2 mitigated
scenario nor exceedance of the AQO for daily TSP under the Tier 1 mitigated scenario at any of the ASRs throughout
the entire construction period. For
annual TSP results, no exceedance of the corresponding AQO was predicted at any
of the ASRs during the construction phase provided the recommended mitigation
measures are in place.
Operation Phase
Majority of the vehicular emission sources
and all marine emission sources are due to respectively the nearby current/planned
road networks serving the West Kowloon area and the existing marine activities
in the surrounding waters, but not due to the underpass road project itself. Therefore, the underpass road project alone
would only have very minor contribution to the predicted air quality impacts at
the ASRs.
According to the modelling results, all the identified ASRs would be in
compliance with the corresponding AQO for hourly, daily and annual SO2;
for hourly, daily and annual NO2 as well as for daily and annual RSP.
However, during the worst case year of 2015, four
existing ASRs, namely, WOB-1, VT1-23, SRT-1 and SRT-2, would be subject to
exceedance of the AQO for hourly NO2 (i.e., 300 μg/m3) by about
3.7-14.9 μg/m3
(or about 1.2%-5.0% of the relevant AQO)
for once a year, and two planned ASRs, namely,
P09-1 and P37-1, would be subject to marginal exceedance of the AQO for daily NO2
(i.e., 150 μg/m3) by about 0.2-0.3 μg/m3 (or about 0.1%-0.2%
of the relevant AQO) for once a year. Since
the numbers of such hourly and daily NO2 exceedances are within the respective
allowable numbers of exceedances (3 times per year for hourly NO2
and once per year for daily NO2), the AQO for hourly and daily NO2
would still be complied with at the six ASRs.
In conclusion, no adverse air quality impacts due to vehicular or marine traffic emissions are anticipated during the operation phase.
This
section presents the assessment of the potential noise impacts associated with the construction and operation
phases of the proposed underpass roads within WKCD site. The total length of proposed underpass roads
is approximately 1400m and the key layout plan is shown in Appendix 4.2c. The interim access
point at Austin Road West has been included into the noise impact assessment as
shown in Appendix
4.2c. Noise generated from various construction activities is the
primary concern during the construction phase. Road traffic noise is not
anticipated as the proposed underpass and permanent underpass from
14.4.1 Noise Legislations, Standards and Guidelines
Control over the generation of construction
noise in
¡ TM on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM)
¡ TM on Noise from Construction Work other than Percussive Piling (GW-TM)
¡ TM on Noise from Construction Work in Designated Areas (DA-TM)
14.4.1.2 General Construction Activities during Non-Restricted Hours
Noise impacts arising from general construction activities other than percussive piling during the daytime period (07:00-19:00 hours of any day not being a Sunday or general holiday) are assessed against the noise standards tabulated in Table 14.4.1 below.
Table 14.4.1: Noise Standards for Daytime Construction Activities
Noise Sensitive Uses |
0700 to 1900
hours on any day not being a Sunday or general holiday, Leq (30
min), dB(A) |
All domestic premises including
temporary housing accommodation |
75 |
Hotels and hostel |
|
Educational institutions
including kindergarten, nurseries and all others where unaided voice
communication is required |
70 65 during examination |
Source: EIAO-TM, Annex 5, Table 1B - Noise Standards for Daytime construction Activities
Note: The above noise standards apply to uses,
which rely on opened windows for ventilation
The
above standards shall be viewed as the maximum permissible noise levels assessed at 1m from the
external facade
The
above standards shall be met as far as possible. All practicable mitigation measures shall be
exhausted and the residual impacts are minimised
14.4.1.3 General Construction Activities during Restricted Hours
Noise impacts arising from general construction activities (excluding percussive piling) conducted during the restricted hours (19:00-07:00 hours on any day and anytime on Sunday or general holiday) and percussive piling during anytime are governed by the NCO.
For carrying out of any general construction activities involving the use of any Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) within restricted hours, a Construction Noise Permit (CNP) is required from the Authority under the NCO. The noise criteria and the assessment procedures for issuing a CNP are specified in the GW-TM under the NCO.
The use of Specified PME (SPME) and/or the carrying out of Prescribed Construction Work (PCW) within a Designated Area (DA) under the NCO during the restricted hours are also prohibited without a CNP. The relevant technical details in Technical Memorandum on Noise from Construction Work in Designated Areas (DA-TM) under NCO can be referred.
Designated areas, in which the control of SPME and PCW shall apply, are established through the Noise Control (Construction Work Designated Areas) Notice made under Section 8A(1) of the NCO. According to the Designated Area defined under the NCO, all part of the works area of this Project will fall within these areas where construction works would be carried out.
Regardless of any description or assessment made in this section, in assessing a filed application for a CNP the Authority will be guided by the relevant Technical Memoranda. The Authority will consider all the factors affecting their decision taking contemporary situations/ conditions into account. Nothing in this Report shall pre-empt the Authority in making their decisions, and there is no guarantee that a CNP will be issued. If a CNP is to be issued, the Authority may include any conditions they consider appropriate and such conditions are to be followed while the works covered by the CNP are being carried out. Failing to do so may lead to cancellation of the permit and prosecution action under the NCO.
According to the construction programme, the proposed construction works would be carried out during non-restricted hours. In case of any construction activities during restricted hours, it is the Contractor’s responsibility to ensure compliance with the NCO and the relevant TMs. The Contractor will be required to submit CNP application to the Noise Control Authority and abide by any conditions stated in the CNP, should one be issued.
14.4.1.4 Ground-borne Construction Noise
Basement design is involved in the proposed Project. The underground construction works will be carried out by cut and cover method. No tunnelling works would be involved in the basement construction. Hence, potential ground-borne noise impact to existing NSRs is not anticipated. As all basement construction works will be completed in Phase 1 of the proposed Project, no underground works will be carried out after completion of the venues with noise sensitive use above the basement. In view of this situation, ground-borne noise impact arising from the construction works of the proposed Project to the planned NSRs is not anticipated. Therefore, no ground-borne noise impact is expected during the construction phase of the Project.
14.4.1.5 Road Traffic Noise
The EIAO-TM published under Section 16(5) of the EIAO is the fundamental legislation of noise criteria for evaluating noise impact of designated projects. The summary of noise criteria is given in Table 14.4.2.
Table 14.4.2: Relevant Road Traffic Noise Standards for Planning Purposes
Uses |
L10
(1hour), dB(A) |
|
All domestic premises including
temporary housing accommodation |
70 |
|
Educational institutions
including kindergartens, nurseries and all others where unaided voice
communication is required |
65 |
|
Notes: (i) The above standards apply to uses which rely on opened windows for ventilation
(ii) The above standards should be viewed as the maximum permissible noise levels assessed at 1m from the external facade
14.4.1.6 Operation Phase - Fixed Plant Noise
For the fixed plant noise assessment, the Acceptable Noise Levels (ANLs) for the NSRs are determined based on the Area Sensitivity Rating (ASR).
ASR
is defined in the Technical Memorandum for the Assessment of Noise from Places
other than Domestic Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites
(IND-TM). The ASR depends on the type of
area and the degree of impact that Influencing Factors (IFs) have on the NSRs
and is determined from Table 14.4.3 below.
Industrial area, major road or the area within the boundary of
Table 14.4.3: Area Sensitivity Rating
Type of Area Containing NSR |
Degree to which NSR is affected by IF |
||
Not Affected |
Indirectly Affected |
Directly Affected |
|
(i) Rural
area, including country parks or village type developments |
A |
B |
B |
(ii) Low
density residential area consisting of low-rise or isolated high-rise
developments |
A |
B |
C |
(iii) Urban
area |
B |
C |
C |
(iv) Area
other than those above |
B |
B |
C |
The ANLs laid down in the Table 2 of the IND-TM is shown in Table 14.4.4 below.
Table 14.4.4: Acceptable Noise Level for Fixed Noise Source
Time Period |
Area Sensitivity Rating |
||
A |
B |
C |
|
Day (0700 to 1900 hours) |
60 |
65 |
70 |
Evening (1900 to 2300 hours) |
|||
Night (2300 to 0700 hours) |
50 |
55 |
60 |
The whole WKCD is
located in urban area. According to Table
14.4.3, the ASR of the area in
Table 14.4.5 Noise Criteria of Fixed Plant Noise
NSR ID. |
Time Period |
ASR# |
ANL – 5, dB(A) |
Background Noise Level, dB(A)* |
Fixed Plant Noise Criteria, dB(A) |
P3b,
VT1, LCS and CRGPS |
Daytime
(0700 to 1900) |
C |
65 |
71 |
65 |
Evening
Time (1900 to 2300) |
65 |
72 |
65 |
||
|
Night-time
(2300 to 0700) |
55 |
69 |
55 |
|
P16a,
P17c, P19, P27b, P29a&b and P32a-c |
Daytime
(0700 to 1900) |
B |
60 |
60 |
60 |
Evening
Time (1900 to 2300) |
60 |
57 |
57 |
||
Night-time
(2300 to 0700) |
50 |
51 |
50 |
||
P10,
P11a&b, P13a-e |
Daytime
(0700 to 1900) |
B |
60 |
63 |
60 |
Evening
Time (1900 to 2300) |
60 |
58 |
58 |
||
Night-time
(2300 to 0700) |
50 |
51 |
50 |
||
P2,
P3a, P5c, P6a&b, P7, P9b, P9c |
Daytime
(0700 to 1900) |
B |
60 |
65 |
60 |
Evening
Time (1900 to 2300) |
60 |
60 |
60 |
||
Night-time
(2300 to 0700) |
50 |
51 |
50 |
||
P5a,
P5b and P9a |
Daytime
(0700 to 1900) |
B |
60 |
65 |
60 |
Evening
Time (1900 to 2300) |
60 |
65 |
60 |
||
|
Night-time
(2300 to 0700) |
50 |
67 |
50 |
|
P16b,
P17a and P17b |
Daytime
(0700 to 1900) |
B |
60 |
68 |
60 |
Evening
Time (1900 to 2300) |
60 |
67 |
60 |
||
|
Night-time
(2300 to 0700) |
50 |
62 |
50 |
|
P24,
P27a and P28 |
Daytime
(0700 to 1900) |
B |
60 |
64 |
60 |
Evening
Time (1900 to 2300) |
60 |
63 |
60 |
||
|
Night-time
(2300 to 0700) |
50 |
61 |
50 |
Notes: (#)Type of area containing NSR inside study area is classified as “Urban Area”. The Influencing Factor (IF) inside study area is Canton Road which with an annual average daily traffic flow in excess of 30,000.
(*) Refer to Appendix 4.1 for the background noise measurement results.
The proposed outdoor theatre in the WKCD would also be affected by fixed noise sources in proximity. As fixed noise criterion for outdoor theatre has not been specified in the EIAO-TM, reference has been made to the Community Noise Exposure Level as proposed in the State of California General Plan Guidelines 2003[2], in which a level greater than 65 dB(A) in terms of Ldn is defined as normally unacceptable for amphitheatre. In considering the Area Sensitive Rating at the proposed Outdoor Theatre shall be B and the corresponding ANL is 65 dB(A) during 0700 to 2300, it is proposed to adopt the noise criterion 5 dB(A) below the ANL or the prevailing background level which is lower for the proposed Outdoor Theatre.
For the Outdoor Theatre proposed in the WKCD site, the current background noise levels measured at the locations of the proposed Outdoor Theatre during daytime and evening are lower than the ANL by more than 5 dB(A). Hence, the current background noise levels are adopted for the establishment of the fixed source noise criteria for that Outdoor Theatre.
Table 14.4.6 Noise Criteria of Fixed Plant Noise for the Outdoor Theatre
NSR ID. |
Time Period |
ASR# |
ANL – 5,
dB(A) |
Background
Noise Level, dB(A)* |
Fixed Plant
Noise Criteria, dB(A) |
P50** |
Daytime (0700 to 1900) |
B |
60 |
59 |
59 |
Outdoor Theatre |
Evening Time (1900 to 2300) |
60 |
58 |
58 |
Notes: (#) Type of area containing NSR inside study area is classified as “Urban Area”.
(*) Refer to Appendix 4.1 for the background noise measurement results.
(**) No activity would be held at the venue during night time.
The Study Area is defined as within 300m of the site boundary of the Project for noise impact assessment. This study area is identified and shown in Figure 4.1.
14.4.2.2 Description of the Environment
Site
visits were conducted in June, July and August 2011 to understand the
existing environment in the vicinity of the Project site. This Project site is
surrounded by the areas with residential, commercial and recreational uses. The
existing noise environment is dominated by the road traffic noise from
14.4.2.3 Identification of Noise Sensitive Receivers
Noise Sensitive Receivers (NSRs) have been identified in accordance with Annex 13 of the EIAO-TM. The NSRs have included existing, planned/committed noise sensitive developments and relevant uses identified on the relevant Outline Zoning Plans, Development Permission Area Plans, Outline Development Plans, Layout Plans and other relevant published land use plans, including plans and drawings published by Lands Department.
For the purpose of noise assessment, the first layer of residential premises located close to the site boundary have been selected as assessment points/ identified representative NSRs within the Assessment Area for prediction of noise impact levels.
According
to the Outline Zoning Plans (“the Approved South
Based on the approved EIA of Road Works at
As
this Project includes residential development, planned NSRs are also identified
within the Project site area for assessment of the potential traffic noise
impact from the proposed underpass. The boundary of all residential parcels
have set back distance from land use zone as shown in Figure 4.1 to avoid potential noise
impact. The minimum setback distance from site boundary at
Central air conditioning will be proposed for all CACFs except Outdoor Theatre within the WKCD, and therefore, will not rely on open windows for ventilation. Hence, no assessment point is proposed for the CACFs except Outdoor Theatre under the airborne noise impact assessment.
Descriptions of selected representative NSRs are tabulated in Table 14.4.7. The representative NSRs for construction noise impact assessment are shown in Figures 4.2a to 4.2e. The representative NSRs for fixed plant noise impact assessment are shown in the Figures 4.4a and 4.4b. Photos of existing noise sensitive receivers are shown in Figure 4.5.
Table 14.4.7: Representative Noise Sensitive Receivers
No. |
NSR ID |
Description |
Use |
Existing/ Planned |
No. of Storeys (Sensitive use only) |
1st Assessment Level (mPD) |
Area Sensitivity Rating |
Noise
Impact Assessment |
||
Construction |
Fixed Source |
Road Traffic |
||||||||
1 |
HT1 |
The |
Residential |
Existing |
65 |
40 |
N/A |
√ |
|
|
2 |
HT3 |
The |
Residential |
Existing |
65 |
40 |
N/A |
√ |
|
|
3 |
AST |
The Arch - |
Residential |
Existing |
52 |
40 |
N/A |
√ |
|
|
4 |
RD |
Development next to Austin
Station |
Residential |
Planned |
20 |
47 |
N/A |
√ |
|
|
5 |
WOB |
Wai On Buiding |
Residential |
Existing |
15 |
7 |
N/A |
√ |
|
|
6 |
VT1 |
The |
Residential |
Existing |
52 |
47 |
C |
√ |
√ |
√ |
7 |
VT2 |
The |
Residential |
Existing |
52 |
47 |
N/A |
√ |
|
|
8 |
LCS |
|
Educational |
Existing |
5 |
8 |
C |
√ |
√ |
√ |
9 |
CRGPS |
|
Educational |
Existing |
6 |
7 |
C |
√ |
√ |
|
10 |
FQ |
Fire Services Department Staff
Quarter |
Residential |
Existing |
7 |
24 |
N/A |
√ |
|
|
11 |
CUL |
The
Cullinan I |
Residential |
Existing |
33 |
40 |
N/A |
√ |
|
|
12 |
P2 |
Parcel 2 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
13 |
22 |
B |
|
√ |
|
13 |
P3 |
Parcel 3 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
6 |
19 |
C |
|
√ |
√ |
14 |
P5 |
Parcel 5 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
9 |
33 |
B |
|
√ |
√ |
15 |
P6 |
Parcel 6 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
8 |
33 |
B |
|
√ |
|
16 |
P7 |
Parcel 7 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
8 |
33 |
B |
√ |
√ |
|
17 |
P9 |
Parcel 9 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
9 |
33 |
B |
|
√ |
√ |
18 |
P10 |
Parcel 10 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
10 |
33 |
B |
|
√ |
|
19 |
P11 |
Parcel 11 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
13 |
22 |
B |
|
√ |
|
20 |
P13 |
Parcel 13 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
9 |
37 |
B |
|
√ |
|
21 |
P16 |
Parcel 16 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
10 |
33 |
B |
|
√ |
|
22 |
P17 |
Parcel 17 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
11 |
22 |
B |
|
√ |
|
23 |
P19 |
Parcel 19 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
10 |
33 |
B |
|
√ |
|
24 |
P22 |
Parcel 22 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
12 |
29 |
N/A |
|
|
|
25 |
P24 |
Parcel 24 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
11 |
33 |
B |
|
√ |
|
26 |
P27 |
Parcel 27 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
9 |
42 |
B |
|
√ |
|
27 |
P28 |
Parcel 28 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
14 |
40 |
B |
|
√ |
|
28 |
P29 |
Parcel 29 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
16 |
37 |
B |
|
√ |
|
29 |
P32 |
Parcel 32 in WKCD |
Residential |
Planned |
10 |
22 |
B |
|
√ |
|
30 |
P50# |
Outdoor Theatre in WKCD |
Performing Arts |
Planned |
N/A |
6 |
B |
|
√ |
|
Note: (N/A) Not Applicable
All
residential floors inside WKCD will be mixed with retail, dining and
entertainment (RDE) and / or office at lower floor below 1st
assessment level to minimize the noise impacts.
(#) The operation of Outdoor Theatre will be after the construction work of Parks, Hotel and M+ Phase 1. No major construction works within 300m will be overlap the operation phase of this NSR so that it is not included in construction noise impact assessment.
14.4.3 Background Noise Condition
Noise surveys were carried out in June, July and August 2011 to investigate the background noise condition of the surrounding environment and the Project site. The baseline noise measurement locations are shown in Figure 4.6.
Nine noise surveys were carried out in the Project site. The noise surveys were undertaken using Type 1 sound level meters, namely Rion NL-18 and Rion NL-31. During each survey, the sound level meter was checked using an acoustic calibrator generating a sound pressure level of 94.0 dB(A) at 1kHz immediately before and after the noise measurement. The measurements were accepted as valid only if the calibration levels before and after the noise measurement were agreed to be within 1.0 dB(A). The sound level meters and acoustic calibrators are calibrated in accredited laboratories yearly to ensure reliable performance. The measurement results are shown in Appendix 4.1.
14.4.4 Identification of Pollution Sources
14.4.4.1 Construction Noise
The major construction activities involved in the Project is site formation and construction of underpass in the WKCD site. The major part of the underpass including the interim access road near Austin Road West will be constructed between year 2014 and 2017. The remaining part of the underpass (permanent access road near Canton Road) will be constructed after the demolition of the existing TST Fire Station after 2022 and it is expected to be completed for operation by 2030. The construction noise impact associated with the underpass will be assessed in both assessment scenarios of year between 2014 and 2017 and year between 2022 and 2030.
As mentioned in Section 14.2.8, the construction programme of this WKCD Project would overlap with other several construction projects including the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL), the Road Works at West Kowloon (RWWK) and the Proposed Road Improvement Works in West Kowloon Reclamation Development Phase 1. Construction noise from these projects was also identified as key noise sources to the identified NSRs under this Project.
14.4.4.2 Road Traffic Noise Sources
During
the operational phase, road traffic noise is anticipated to be minimal as a
large portion of the proposed underpass is fully underground. Noise from the
open sections of the access ramps connecting the grade roads and the proposed underpass,
and the noise emission from the portals of the underpass road are identified as
sources of road traffic noise impact. There are two accesses to the underpass
are designed with open road sections. One is the interim access at
14.4.4.3 Fixed Noise Sources
Operation of planned fixed plant such as air intake/exhaust openings for ventilation of underpass section and basement facilities located above ground within WKCD would likely generate noise impacts. Some other facilities are proposed within the WKCD development including a district cooling system, sewage pump sumps, electricity substation and wind turbines, mentioned in Section 2.2, are also considered as fixed noise sources within the WKCD. The district cooling system and sewage pump sumps will be located at basement level served by the basement ventilation system with above-ground ventilation openings, which are taken into account in the fixed plant noise impact assessment.
Other
existing and planned fixed plant noise sources which could impact on the noise
sensitive uses in WKCD as well as all existing nearby NSRs are also identified.
Those sources include openings of ventilation shafts serving the Kowloon
Station, Austin Station, Airport Railway, Western Harbour Crossing Tunnel,
The potential noise impact from the proposed electricity substation has also been taken into account in the assessment. Installation of wind turbines is an optional component of WKCD, subject to funding and final decision making. The potential noise impact from wind turbines has also been included in the assessment based on currently best available information, adopting a conservative approach.
The existing TST fire station is located at the east part of the WKCD. The distance between the nearest planned residential parcel (NSR P7) to TST fire station is 105m and there is no direct line of sight to the entrance of the fire station. Noise from fire stations would be related to emergency duties which are short duration and infrequent. Adverse noise impact due to TST fire station is not expected. In addition, the relocation of TST Fire Station is expected to be around year 2022 to 2025 and thus no long term noise impact, if any, is anticipated.
Optional automatic refuse collection system would be built in WKCD if technically feasible and financially viable. Major noise sources generally are related to air blowers, refuse compactor, refuse separator and the collection point, which are highly depend on detail design layout plan which subject to further study. Preventive measures such as careful siting of noisy equipment like air blowers, refuse compactor, de-odorising facilities and exhaust should be adopted in first place. Further mitigation measures such as silencers, acoustic enclosure and shielding should be considered if necessary in order to comply with noise standards. Most of the system could be underground or located in shielded areas and associated impacts could be controlled. Adverse impacts are not expected.
14.4.5 Assessment Methodology
14.4.5.1 Construction Noise
Assessment approach to the noise impact is in line with the Guidance Note titled “Preparation of Construction Noise Impact Assessment under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance” (GN 9/2010).
In addition, the assessment of construction noise impact is based on standard acoustic principles, and the guidelines given in GW-TM issued under the NCO where appropriate. Where no sound power level (SWL) can be found in the relevant TM, reference has been made to BS 5228 Part 1:2009 or noise emission levels measured for PME used in previous projects in Hong Kong. The general approach is summarized below:
i. Formulate a typical construction schedule/ programme;
ii. Identify a typical project-specific equipment inventory for each work stage together with the number;
iii. Obtain from GW-TM, the Sound Power Level (SWL) for each PME assumed in the equipment inventory;
iv. Select representative NSRs for the construction noise impact assessment;
v. Calculate the unmitigated Predicted Noise Level (PNL) and correct it for facade reflection to obtain the Corrected Noise Level (CNL) at any NSRs;
vi. If necessary, re-select typical project-specific silenced equipment and calculate the mitigated noise impact;
vii. Compare the mitigated CNL with the noise standards to determine acceptability and the need for further mitigation.
The calculation methodology is estimated with the following standard formula (1):
SPL = SWL – DC + FC (1)
where
Sound Pressure Levels, SPL in dB(A)
Sound Power Levels, SWL in dB(A)
Distance Attenuation, DC in dB(A) = 20∙log(D)+8 (where D is the distance between
NSRs and noise source in meters)
Façade Correction, FC in dB(A)
= 3dB(A)
For the cumulative noise impact during
construction phase, projects which included Express Rail Link, Road Works at
In addition, a current concrete batching plant (CBP) of XRL at east of Project area as shown in Figures 4.2b to 4.2e will be handed over to WKCDA in year 2014. The operation, demolition and relocation of that CBP have been taken into account in the construction noise impact assessment accordingly. It is assumed that the CBP will be relocated to the west of Project area in year 2017 for worst case scenario consideration as shown in Figures 4.2f to 4.2i.
Road traffic noise levels at the representative assessment points will be calculated based on the peak hour traffic flow within a 15 years period upon commencement of operation of the road project i.e. the assessment year. Traffic noise will be predicted using the model “RoadNoise”, which has been used before in other similar EIA studies. The model has fully incorporated the procedures and methodology documented in “Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN)” (1988) published by the U.K. Department of Transport.
The planned noise sensitive use facades
within WKCD and vicinity NSRs may have potential road traffic noise impact from
major roads surrounding WKCD. The peak hour traffic flows of the surrounding
road links and the locations of the road links are shown in Appendix 4.2a.
As the PM peak hour traffic flows of those dominant surrounding road links are
higher than that during the AM peak hour, the PM peak hour traffic flow will be
adopted in the assessment. The key plans for WKCD external and internal road
links for the design year are shown in Appendices
4.2b, 4.2c and 4.2d.
The proposed underpass will be connected to
the
As a
large portion of the proposed underpass of the Project
will be fully enclosed by the above ground structures, it is anticipated that the contribution from
the underpass to overall road traffic
noise impact shall be minimal. Noise from the open road sections of the access to the underpass have been taken into account in the assessment
of the road traffic noise impact.
An assessment of the unmitigated
road traffic noise levels at the representative NSRs under both interim and
permanent scheme in the assessment year has been carried out. If exceedance of the relevant road traffic
noise criteria is predicted and which is contributed significantly by the proposed road
sections under the Project, direct noise mitigation measures will be considered. In case the proposed
direct noise mitigation measures could not be implemented due to site constraints and other uncertainties, indirect
noise mitigation measures have also been considered.
Other than the existing road sections paved with low noise surfacing, the extent of low noise road surfacing, barriers and semi-enclosures proposed in the Road Works at West Kowloon project has also been considered in the unmitigated scenario of the road traffic noise impact assessment.
14.4.5.3 Fixed Plant Noise
In the absence of any detailed information and noise specification for the proposed fixed plant, the maximum allowable noise emission levels at the shaft/ exhaust openings have been determined for future detailed design of the fixed plant.
For the assessment of noise from the fixed plant, the maximum allowable sound power levels (Max SWLs) of the identified fixed noise sources were determined by adopting standard acoustics principles. The following formula was used for calculating the Max SWLs of the fixed plant:
SPL = Max SWL – DC + FC - BC
where
SPL: Sound Pressure Level in dB(A)
Max
SWL: Maximum Allowable Sound Power Level
in dB(A)
DC: Distance Attenuation in dB(A) = 20 log D + 8 [where D is the distance in m]
FC: Façade Correction in dB(A) = +3 dB(A)
BC: Barrier Correction in dB(A)
For those fixed plant noise sources falling within the view angle of the NSR but with no direct line of sight to the opening, a 5 dB(A) attenuation would be applied. For the case where the NSR with no direct line of sight to the source/opening which is located on the other side of the building or completely blocked by other building(s), a 10 dB(A) attenuation would be applied. If the noise sources do not fall within the view angle of the representative NSR under assessment, it is assumed that these noise sources are insignificant to that NSR. However, these noise sources are still taken into account in the assessment for conservative approach but a 10 dB(A) attenuation would be applied.
If exceedance to the noise criteria is found for one NSR, the initial SWL of the dominant sources to that NSR would be gradually lowered until the corrected SPL at that NSR meets the acceptable level. The process would be repeated for other representative NSRs with exceedance of the noise criteria until all corrected SPLs at the representative NSRs meet the noise criteria. The maximum allowable SWLs of the proposed fixed plants have been predicted by this approach.
For those proposed fixed plant of Express Rail Link (XRL) West Kowloon Terminus, the locations and maximum allowable sound power levels were made reference to latest information in the Environmental Review Report for the application of variation of Environmental Permit conditions (VEP) of the approved XRL project. For those existing fixed plant noise sources, the design information were made reference to the relevant approved EIA Reports or obtained from the relevant authorities. Should information of certain sources which was not available during the course of preparing this assessment, site visits and noise measurements were carried out to determine the locations of the fixed sources and regarding sound power levels. The noise impact from these sources would then be assessed with the use of the same methodology as stated above for the planned sources.
Corrections of tonality, intermittency or impulsiveness are not considered in the assessment. If the noise exhibits any of these characteristics during the operation of the plant, the maximum allowable sound power level should be reduced in accordance with the recommendation given in Section 3.3 of the IND-TM.
14.4.6 Evaluation and Assessment of the Noise Impacts
14.4.6.1 Construction Noise
The type and quantity of Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) likely to be used for the site formation works and construction of the underpass and their Sound Power Levels (SWLs) are shown in Appendices 4.4a to 4.4d.
According to the tentative construction
programme, it is likely that there will be an overlap of this Project with some
other potentially concurrent projects including “Express Rail Link”, “Road
Works at
The unmitigated noise
levels from this Project are predicted and presented in Table 14.4.8
below. Details of the construction noise impact at the representative NSRs are
shown in Appendices 4.4a to 4.4d.
The prediction results indicate that the noise impact of unmitigated construction activities from this project would cause exceedance of the relevant daytime construction noise criteria. Mitigation measures are therefore required for these NSRs in order to alleviate the noise impacts generated during the construction phase.
Table 14.4.8: Unmitigated Construction Airborne Noise Impact from this Project
NSR ID |
Use |
|
Predicted Noise Level dB(A) |
Noise Criteria dB(A) |
Exceedance of Noise Criteria? |
Mitigation Measure required? |
|||||
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2022 to 2030** |
Overall |
||||||
HT1 |
Residential |
79-85 |
79-81 |
79-81 |
77-79 |
72 |
72-85 |
75 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
HT3 |
Residential |
78-83 |
79-80 |
79-80 |
76-78 |
72 |
72-83 |
75 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
AST |
Residential |
79-84 |
79-81 |
79-81 |
77-79 |
70 |
70-84 |
75 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
RD# |
Residential |
- |
76-77 |
75-77 |
72-74 |
74 |
74-77 |
75 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
WOB |
Residential |
76-79 |
75-76 |
73-76 |
70-73 |
73 |
70-79 |
75 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
VT1 |
Residential |
78-81 |
77-78 |
75-78 |
71-74 |
79 |
71-81 |
75 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
VT2 |
Residential |
77-80 |
76-77 |
74-77 |
71-74 |
76 |
71-80 |
75 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
LCS |
Educational |
77-80 |
76-78 |
75-78 |
72-75 |
81 |
72-81 |
70/65^ |
Yes |
Yes |
|
CRGPS |
Educational |
76-79 |
75-77 |
75-77 |
71-75 |
81 |
71-81 |
70/65^ |
Yes |
Yes |
|
FQ# |
Residential |
81-84 |
80-82 |
81-82 |
77-81 |
-- |
77-84 |
75 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
CUL |
Residential |
72-76 |
73-74 |
73-74 |
71-73 |
78 |
69-78 |
75 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
P7# |
Residential |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
83 |
83 |
75 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Note: Bold figures denotes the predicted noise level is higher than the relevant daytime construction noise criteria
(**) The remaining part of the underpass would be carried out between 2022 and 2030 after demolition of the TST Fire Station. The predicted noise levels of construction of permanent underpass are taken from that of excluded area construction between year 2022 and year 2030 in Appendix 4.4i. Concurrent construction works within WKCD has been included in the predicted noise levels.
(^) Criteria for examination period
(#) MTR confirmed that the residential development next to
Austin Station will be occupied in middle of 2015.
FQ will be relocated before
permanent underpass construction.
P7 is assumed to be occupied
after Year 2017.
14.4.6.2 Road Traffic Noise
The proposed underpass is scheduled to be commenced operation in 2017. According to the projection of the traffic impact assessment, the year with maximum traffic flow within a 15-year period upon commencement of operation of the proposed underpass is determined to be 2032. Therefore, the peak hour traffic data for year 2032 has been adopted for the assessment. After reviewing both morning and afternoon peak hour flow data, the afternoon peak hour flow data was chosen for the assessment as greater noise impact will be predicted at the NSRs in WKCD.
A large portion of the proposed underpass will be fully
enclosed by the above ground structures, the contribution from the underground section
of the underpass to
the overall road traffic noise impact is anticipated to
be insignificant. The
potential unmitigated road traffic noise impacts on the NSRs for the Project at
Year 2032 due to operation of the open road sections of the access connecting the underpass, as
well as the overall noise impacts cumulating with other existing and planned roads
sections nearby have been assessed.
The assessment results are summarised in Table 14.4.9
and Table 14.4.10 below for the scenario with interim access at
Table 14.4.9: Unmitigated Road Traffic Noise
Impact in Year 2032 – Scenario with Interim Access
at
NSR ID |
Noise Criteria, L10(1 hr) dB(A) |
Predicted Road Traffic Noise Level, L10 (1hr) dB(A) |
||
Underpass Access |
Overall |
Contribution from Underpass Access |
||
P3a |
70 |
N/A* |
54 - 63 |
0.0 |
P3b |
70 |
N/A* |
65 -
72 |
0.0 |
P5 |
70 |
58 - 59 |
71 - 72 |
0.2 - 0.3 |
P9 |
70 |
54 |
70 - 71 |
0.1 |
VT1 |
70 |
22 - 42 |
72 - 78 |
0.0 – 0.1 |
LCS |
65 |
17 |
81 - 84 |
0.0 |
Note: *
Road traffic noise level of Project roads is negligible.
Bold figures denotes the predicted noise level is exceeded the relevant traffic noise criteria.
Table 14.4.10: Unmitigated Road Traffic Noise Impact in
Year 2032 – Scenario with Permanent Access at
NSR ID |
Noise Criteria, L10(1
hr) dB(A) |
Predicted Road Traffic Noise Level, L10 (1hr) dB(A) |
||
Underpass Access |
Overall |
Contribution from Underpass Access |
||
P3a |
70 |
N/A* |
54 - 63 |
0.0 |
P3b |
70 |
41 - 51 |
65 - 72 |
0.0 |
P5 |
70 |
N/A* |
71 - 72 |
0.0 |
P9 |
70 |
N/A* |
70 |
0.0 |
VT1 |
70 |
51 - 55 |
72 - 78 |
0.0 – 0.1 |
LCS |
65 |
56 - 59 |
81 - 84 |
0.0 |
Note: * Road traffic noise level of Project roads is
negligible.
Bold figures denotes the predicted noise level is exceeded the relevant traffic noise criteria.
Exceedances of noise criteria were found at NSRs P3b, P5, P9, VT1 and LCS. However, the exceedances were found dominated by the contributions of noise from the surrounding existing and the committed RWWK roads sections. The predicted noise contributions to the overall traffic noise levels from the proposed underpass of this Project are estimated to be less than 1.0 dB(A) at these affected NSRs and the road traffic noise levels of the proposed roads are all below the relevant noise criteria. Direct noise mitigation measures on the Project road sections are deemed not necessary as they would be ineffective in improving the noise environment at the NSRs. The underpass proposed under this WKCD Project is hence not anticipated to have a significant contribution to the overall road traffic noise impact.
The traffic noise generated inside the underpass might reverberate within the structure and emit through the portals, resulting in increase of traffic noise level at the identified NSRs. However, according to research findings, the noise from portal would not be significant provided that a tunnel length equivalent to approximately 2-3 time of diameter is installed with sound-absorbing materials. To address the potential portal noise problem, mitigation measures in form of installing sound-absorbing materials on the inner walls and ceiling of the portals is recommended where necessary. Details of the mitigation measures are briefed in Section 14.4.7.2.
An assessment of the scenario without the Project has been conducted and the results with detailed breakdown of road traffic noise impacts are shown in Appendix 14.4.3 for reference.
14.4.6.3 Fixed Plant Noise
According to the preliminary design information, noise from fixed plant of the Project would mainly be associated with the above ground ventilation openings serving the underground facilities. Sixty-six locations were identified within WKCD for these openings. These 66 openings and other identified major fixed plant noise sources are summarized in Table 14.4.11 below and the regarding locations are shown in Figures 4.4a to 4.4b.
Table 14.4.11: Summary of Fixed Plant Noise Sources
Fixed Noise Source |
Existing/ |
Number of Source Facade |
Opening ID# |
Louvres along the Austin Road West (ICC, The Harbourside and The
Element) |
Existing |
4 |
N3 to N6* |
Louvres along the Lin Cheung Road |
Existing |
5 |
N7 to N11* |
Louvres from XRL West Kowloon Terminus |
Planned |
19 |
N12 to N15*** |
Louvres from Austin Station |
Existing |
4 |
N16 to N19** |
Fixed Plants from Austin Station |
Existing |
3 |
N20 to N22** |
Fixed Plants from |
Existing |
4 |
N23 to N26* |
|
Existing |
4 |
N27 to N30* |
Louvres of China Harbour City |
Existing |
1 |
N31* |
|
Existing |
1 |
N32*^ |
|
Existing |
4 |
N33 to N36** |
Ventilation Openings within WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement
Facilities (including District Cooling
System and Sewage Pump Sumps) |
Planned |
43 |
01D to 04D, 05D1 to 05D3, 06D1 to 06D2, 07D, 08D1 to 08D2, 10D1 to
10D4, 11D, 12D1 to 12D3, 13D1 to 13D4, 14D1 to 14D2, 15D1 to 15D3, 17D to
20D, 26D to 27D, 29D to 32D, 39D1 to 39D2, 40D1 to 40D2 |
|
Planned |
15 |
09VS7, 13TVS1, 14VS6, 14PVS6*** |
Ventilation Openings for CLP Electricity Substation |
Planned |
4 |
42D1 to 42D4 |
Proposed Wind Turbine |
Planned |
38 |
W1 to W38 |
Notes: (#) Noise Source Opening ID N1 and N2 are not used.
(*) The sound power levels were
determined from on-site measurements (details given
in Appendix 4.1a)
(**)
The sound power levels were made reference to the relevant approved KSL EIA report
Table 6-22.
(***) The sound power levels were made reference to the latest information in
VEP of XRL project.
(^) Fixed plant is not in operation during night time period.
According to the noise measurements for existing fixed
noise sources as shown in Appendix 4.1b, KSL EIA and
latest information in VEP of XRL project. The other identified major fixed
plant noise sources are summarized
in Table 14.4.12 below.
Table 14.4.12: SWLs of the Existing Fixed Plant and Fixed Plant from XRL projects
Fixed Noise Source |
Source ID |
SWL, dB(A) |
||
Daytime |
Evening Time |
Night time |
||
Louvres along the Austin Road West* (ICC, The Harbourside and The Element) |
N3 |
95 |
93 |
93 |
N4 |
93 |
92 |
88 |
|
N5 |
93 |
92 |
89 |
|
N6 |
88 |
88 |
85 |
|
Louvres along the Lin Cheung Road*^ |
N7 |
92 |
88 |
-- |
N8 |
96 |
96 |
-- |
|
N9 |
95 |
99 |
-- |
|
N10 |
95 |
101 |
-- |
|
N11 |
107 |
104 |
-- |
|
Louvres from XRL West Kowloon
Terminus*** |
N12a-d |
88 |
88 |
78 |
N12e-f |
89 |
89 |
79 |
|
N13a-b |
88 |
88 |
78 |
|
N14a-g |
89 |
89 |
79 |
|
N15a-d |
89 |
89 |
79 |
|
Louvres from Austin Station** |
N16 |
78 |
78 |
68 |
N17 |
72 |
72 |
62 |
|
N18 |
72 |
72 |
62 |
|
N19 |
78 |
78 |
68 |
|
Fixed Plants from Austin Station** |
N20 |
73 |
73 |
63 |
N21 |
73 |
73 |
63 |
|
N22 |
73 |
73 |
63 |
|
Fixed Plants from Kowloon Station Tunnel
Ventilation Building* |
N23 |
99 |
99 |
99 |
N24 |
99 |
99 |
99 |
|
N25 |
99 |
99 |
99 |
|
N26 |
99 |
99 |
99 |
|
Western Harbour Crossing Tunnel Ventilation
Building* |
N27 |
97 |
97 |
97 |
N28 |
97 |
97 |
97 |
|
N29 |
97 |
97 |
97 |
|
N30 |
97 |
97 |
97 |
|
Louvres of China Harbour City*^ |
N31 |
95 |
95 |
-- |
China Ferry Terminal*^ |
N32 |
99 |
99 |
-- |
Canton Road Plant Building** |
N33 |
105 |
105 |
95 |
N34 |
110 |
110 |
100 |
|
N35 |
105 |
105 |
95 |
|
N36 |
104 |
104 |
96 |
|
West Kowloon Terminus Ventilation
Opening at Parcel 9 of WKCD*** |
VS7-1 (1&2) |
77 |
77 |
67 |
|
77 |
77 |
67 |
|
|
VS7-2 |
77 |
77 |
67 |
|
VS7-3 (1&2) |
77 |
77 |
67 |
|
77 |
77 |
67 |
|
|
VS7-4 (1&2) |
77 |
77 |
67 |
|
77 |
77 |
67 |
|
|
VS7-5 (1&2) |
77 |
77 |
67 |
|
77 |
77 |
67 |
|
West Kowloon Terminus Ventilation
Opening at Parcel 13 of WKCD*** |
TVS1-1 |
83 |
83 |
73 |
West Kowloon Terminus Ventilation
Opening at Parcel 14 of WKCD*** |
VS6-1 |
80 |
80 |
70 |
|
VS6-2 |
80 |
80 |
70 |
|
VS6-3 |
80 |
80 |
70 |
|
PVS6-1 |
78 |
78 |
68 |
|
PVS6-2 |
77 |
77 |
67 |
Notes: (#) Noise Source Opening ID N1 and N2 are not used.
(*) The sound power levels were
determined from on-site measurements (details
given in Appendix 4.1a)
(**)
The sound power levels were made reference to the relevant approved KSL EIA report
Table 6-22.
(***) The sound power levels were made reference to the latest information in VEP
of XRL project.
(^) Fixed plant is not in operation during night time period.
Based on the methodology mentioned in Section 14.4.5.3, the maximum allowable
SWLs of the proposed fixed plants during
daytime and night-time are predicted as summarized in Table 14.4.13 below.
Table 14.4.13: Maximum Allowable SWLs of the Fixed Plant within WKCD
Fixed Noise Source |
Source ID |
Maximum
Allowable SWL, dB(A) |
||
Daytime |
Evening Time |
Night time |
||
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 1 within WKCD
for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
01D |
85 |
85 |
69 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 2 within WKCD
for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
02D |
82 |
76 |
69 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 3 within WKCD
for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
03D |
80 |
80 |
70 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 4 within WKCD
for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
04D |
85 |
85 |
70 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 5 within WKCD
for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
05D1 |
83 |
82 |
70 |
05D2 |
83 |
82 |
70 |
|
|
05D3 |
83 |
82 |
70 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 6 within WKCD
for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
06D1 |
85 |
80 |
75 |
06D2 |
85 |
80 |
75 |
|
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 7 within WKCD
for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
07D |
87 |
87 |
65 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 8 within WKCD
for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
08D1 |
80 |
80 |
70 |
08D2 |
80 |
80 |
70 |
|
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 10 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
10D1 |
78 |
74 |
65 |
10D2 |
78 |
74 |
65 |
|
|
10D3 |
78 |
74 |
65 |
|
10D4 |
78 |
74 |
65 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 11 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
11D |
77 |
73 |
66 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 12 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
12D1 |
85 |
83 |
69 |
12D2 |
85 |
83 |
69 |
|
|
12D3 |
85 |
83 |
69 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 13 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
13D1 |
79 |
76 |
70 |
13D2 |
79 |
76 |
70 |
|
|
13D3 |
79 |
76 |
70 |
|
13D4 |
79 |
76 |
70 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 14 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
14D1 |
85 |
82 |
72 |
14D2 |
85 |
82 |
72 |
|
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 15 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
15D1 |
85 |
82 |
72 |
15D2 |
85 |
82 |
72 |
|
|
15D3 |
85 |
82 |
72 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 17 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
17D |
87 |
84 |
78 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 18 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
18D |
87 |
87 |
80 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 19 within WKCD
for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
19D |
86 |
86 |
75 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 20 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
20D |
86 |
86 |
84 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 26 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
26D |
87 |
87 |
70 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 27 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
27D |
87 |
87 |
78 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 29 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
29D |
87 |
85 |
70 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 30 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
30D |
84 |
81 |
74 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 31 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
31D |
86 |
85 |
75 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 32 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
32D |
85 |
80 |
72 |
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 39 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
39D1 |
98 |
96 |
87 |
39D2 |
98 |
96 |
87 |
|
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 40 within
WKCD for Underpass Section and Basement Facilities |
40D1 |
98 |
96 |
87 |
40D2 |
98 |
96 |
87 |
|
Ventilation Openings of Parcel 42 within
WKCD for CLP Electricity |
42D1 |
98 |
96 |
80 |
|
42D2 |
98 |
96 |
80 |
42D3 |
98 |
96 |
80 |
|
42D4 |
98 |
96 |
80 |
|
Proposed Wind Turbine |
W1 to W38 |
82 |
82 |
82 |
With the adoption of the proposed maximum allowable SWLs of the proposed fixed plants, the fixed plant noise impacts to the NSRs within or in the vicinity of the WKCD are presented in Appendix 4.6. The impact noise levels at all selected NSRs complied with the relevant noise criteria for the daytime, evening time and night time periods. Therefore, no adverse fixed plant noise impact to the existing NSRs is anticipated.
14.4.7.1 Construction Noise
¡ good site practice to limit noise emissions at source;
¡ selection of quieter plant;
¡ use of movable noise barrier;
¡ use of noise enclosure/ acoustic shed;
¡ use of noise insulating fabric, and
¡ scheduling of construction works outside school examination periods.
While it is recognised that the Contractor may develop a different package of mitigation measures to meet the required noise standards, the following suite of practical and implementable measures demonstrate an approach that would be feasible to reduce noise to acceptable levels.
Good Site Practice
Good site practice and noise management can significantly reduce the impact of construction site activities on nearby NSRs. The following package of measures should be followed during each phase of construction:
¡ only well-maintained plant to be operated on-site and plant should be serviced regularly during the construction works;
¡ machines and plant that may be in intermittent use to be shut down between work periods or should be throttled down to a minimum;
¡ plant known to emit noise strongly in one direction, should, where possible, be orientated to direct noise away from the NSRs;
¡ mobile plant should be sited as far away from NSRs as possible; and
¡ material stockpiles and other structures to be effectively utilised, where practicable, to screen noise from on-site construction activities.
Selecting Quieter Plant
The Contractor may be able to obtain particular models of plant that are quieter than the standards given in the GW-TM. This is one of the most effective measures and is increasingly practicable because of the availability of quiet equipment.
Quiet plant whose actual SWL is less than the value specified in GW-TM for the same piece of equipment. Examples of SWLs for specific silenced PME taken from EPD’s QPME Inventory and “Sound Power Levels of Other Commonly Used PME” are presented in Table 14.4.14. It should be noted that various types of silenced equipment can be found in Hong Kong.
Table 14.4.14 Quieter PME Recommended for Adoption during Construction Phase
PME |
Power rating/size, weight |
Reference |
SWL, dB(A) |
Crane, mobile |
213kW |
EPD-01516 |
101 |
Excavator, wheeled / tracked |
112.5kW |
EPD-01230 |
99 |
Dump truck |
5.5 tonne < gross vehicle weight ≤ 38 tonne |
EPD document “Sound Power Levels of Other Commonly Used PME” |
105 |
Lorry |
5.5 tonne < gross vehicle weight ≤ 38 tonne |
EPD document “Sound Power Levels of Other Commonly Used PME” |
105 |
Whilst quieter PME are listed, the Contractor may be
able to obtain particular models of plant that are quieter than the PMEs given
in GW-TM.
Use of Movable Noise Barriers
Movable noise barriers can be very effective in screening noise from particular items of plant when constructing the Project. Noise barriers located along the active works area close to the noise generating component of a PME could produce at least 10 dB(A) screening for stationary plant and 5 dB(A) for mobile plant provided the direct line of sight between the PME and the NSRs is blocked. A schematic configuration of a single movable noise barrier for PME is shown in Figure 4.9.
Use of Noise Enclosure/ Acoustic Shed
The use of noise enclosure or acoustic shed is to cover stationary PME such as air compressor and concrete pump. With the adoption of the noise enclosure, the PME could be completely screened, and noise reduction of 15 dB(A) can be achieved according to the EIAO Guidance Note No.9/2010. A schematic configuration of full noise enclosure for PME is shown in Figure 4.10.
Use of Noise Insulating Fabric
Noise insulating fabric can also be adopted for certain PME (e.g. drill rig, pilling machine etc). The fabric should be lapped such that there are no openings or gaps on the joints. According to the approved Tsim Sha Tsui Station Northern Subway EIA report (AEIAR-127/2008), a noise reduction of 10 dB(A) can be achieved for the PME lapped with the noise insulating fabric.
The noise screening benefit for each item of plant considered in this assessment is listed in Table 14.4.15.
Table 14.4.15 Noise Mitigation Measures for Certain PME during Construction Phase
PME |
Mitigation Measures Proposed |
Noise Reduction, dB(A) |
Air
compressor |
Noise
enclosure |
15 |
Generator |
Noise
enclosure |
15 |
Water
pump |
Noise
enclosure |
15 |
Piling, large diameter bored,
grab and chisel |
Noise
insulating fabric |
10 |
Piling, large diameter bored,
reverse circulation drill |
Noise
insulating fabric |
10 |
Piling, large diameter bored,
oscillator |
Noise
insulating fabric |
10 |
Piling,
diaphragm wall, hydraulic extractor |
Noise
insulating fabric |
10 |
Piling
rig |
Noise
insulating fabric |
10 |
Drill
rig, rotary type |
Noise
insulating fabric |
10 |
Grout
mixer |
Movable
noise barrier |
10 |
Grout
pump |
Movable noise barrier |
10 |
Poker,
vibratory, hand-held |
Movable
noise barrier |
10 |
Welding
set |
Movable
noise barrier |
10 |
Concrete pump, lorry mounted |
Movable
noise barrier |
10 |
Bar
bender and cutter |
Movable
noise barrier |
10 |
Handheld breaker |
Movable
noise barrier |
10 |
Circular wood saw |
Movable
noise barrier |
10 |
Hand-held drill/grinder |
Movable
noise barrier |
10 |
Concrete mixer |
Movable
noise barrier |
10 |
Concrete
lorry mixer |
Movable
noise barrier |
5 |
Excavator |
Movable
noise barrier |
5 |
Mobile
crane |
Movable
noise barrier |
5 |
Dump
truck |
Movable
noise barrier |
5 |
Crane
lorry |
Movable
noise barrier |
5 |
Site
fork lift truck |
Movable
noise barrier |
5 |
Lorry |
Movable
noise barrier |
5 |
Tipper
lorry |
Movable
noise barrier |
5 |
These enclosures and noise barriers should be free of gaps and made of materials having a surface mass density in excess of 10 kg/m2. To improve the effectiveness of noise reduction, non-flammable absorptive lining can be adhered on the inner surface of the noise barriers. The barrier can be in the form of vertical or bend top barrier with an effective height to block the line of sight to NSRs.
Scheduling of Construction Works outside School Examination Periods
The daytime construction noise criterion during school examination period is 65 dB(A), which is lower than the normal daytime school criterion of 70 dB(A). During construction phase, the contractor should liaise with the educational institutions (including NSRs LCS and CRGPS) to obtain the examination schedule and avoid the noisy construction activities during school examination periods.
Mitigated Construction Noise Impacts
The effect of the use of quiet plant and using movable barriers, enclosure and insulating fabric has been investigated for the practicable construction activities. The mitigated noise levels from this Project are presented in Table 14.4.16. Mitigated Construction Plant Inventory and details of the mitigated construction noise impact are shown in Appendices 4.10a to 4.10d.
Table 14.4.16: Mitigated Construction Airborne Noise Impact from this Project
NSR ID |
Use |
|
Predicted Noise Level dB(A) |
Noise Criteria dB(A) |
Exceedance of Noise Criteria |
Residual Impact? |
||||||
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2022-2030** |
Overall |
|||||||
HT1 |
Residential |
67-73 |
68-70 |
69-70 |
68-70 |
62 |
62-73 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
HT3 |
Residential |
66-72 |
67-69 |
69-70 |
67-70 |
62 |
62-72 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
AST |
Residential |
66-73 |
67-70 |
69-70 |
67-70 |
60 |
60-73 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
RD# |
Residential |
- |
67-68 |
65-68 |
63-65 |
64 |
63-68 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
WOB |
Residential |
65-67 |
65-66 |
63-66 |
61-63 |
63 |
61-67 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
VT1 |
Residential |
67-69 |
67-68 |
64-69 |
63-65 |
69 |
63-69 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
VT2 |
Residential |
66-69 |
67-68 |
64-68 |
62-64 |
66 |
62-69 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
LCS |
Educational |
67-68 |
66-67 |
65-67 |
63-65 |
70 |
63-70 |
70/65^ |
Yes |
Yes |
||
CRGPS |
Educational |
66-68 |
65-67 |
64-67 |
63-65 |
70 |
63-70 |
70/65^ |
Yes |
Yes |
||
FQ# |
Residential |
71-73 |
71-72 |
69-72 |
68-71 |
-- |
68-73 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
CUL |
Residential |
61-65 |
62-64 |
64-65 |
63-66 |
64 |
61-65 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
P7# |
Residential |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
73 |
73 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
Note: (**) The remaining part of the underpass would be carried out between 2022 and 2030 after demolition of the TST Fire Station. The predicted noise levels of construction of permanent underpass are taken from that of excluded area construction between year 2022 and year 2030 in Appendix 4.10i. Concurrent construction works within WKCD has been included in the predicted noise levels.
(^) Criteria for examination
period.
(#) MTR confirmed that the residential development next to
Austin Station will be occupied in middle of 2015.
FQ will be relocated before
permanent underpass construction.
P7 is assumed to be occupied
after Year 2017.
With the incorporation of quiet plant and use of movable noise barriers, enclosure and insulating fabric, the results indicated that the mitigated noise impact associated with the construction of the Project would comply with the daytime construction noise criterion at most of the representative NSRs. Residual construction noise impact was predicted at two educational NSRs during examination periods, namely “LCS” and “CRGPS”. According to the website of Lai Chack Middle School, March, June and December are examination periods. The CRGPS has been assumed same months as the examination periods. During the examination periods, the predicted exceedances for these NSRs are 1-5 dB(A). All practicable mitigation measures including movable barrier, enclosure, insulating fabric and quiet plants have been proposed and exhausted to minimise the noise impact. In addition, it is noted that noise insulation works have been installed at this two schools and therefore significant noise impact would not be anticipated.
Cumulative Construction Noise Impacts
The overall cumulative construction noise levels from this Project and the concurrent projects are presented in Table 14.4.17. The predicted noise levels have included the cumulative impacts from other potentially concurrent projects. Details of the cumulative mitigated construction noise impact are shown in Appendices 4.10a to 4.10i.
Table 14.4.17: Overall Cumulative Construction Noise Impact
NSR ID |
Use |
|
Predicted Noise Level dB(A)* |
Noise Criteria dB(A) |
Exceedance of Noise Criteria |
Residual Impact? |
||||||
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2022-2030** |
Overall |
|||||||
HT1 |
Residential |
70-75 |
68-70 |
69-70 |
68-70 |
62 |
68-75 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
HT3 |
Residential |
69-74 |
67-69 |
69-70 |
67-70 |
62 |
67-74 |
75 |
Yes |
No |
||
AST |
Residential |
71-76 |
68-72 |
69-70 |
67-70 |
60 |
67-76 |
75 |
Yes |
Yes |
||
RD# |
Residential |
- |
67-70 |
65-68 |
63-65 |
64 |
63-70 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
WOB |
Residential |
68-73 |
65-68 |
63-66 |
61-63 |
63 |
61-73 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
VT1 |
Residential |
69-72 |
67-69 |
64-69 |
63-65 |
69 |
63-72 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
VT2 |
Residential |
68-71 |
67-68 |
64-68 |
62-64 |
66 |
62-71 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
LCS |
Educational |
68-72 |
66-68 |
65-67 |
63-65 |
70 |
63-72 |
70/65^ |
Yes |
Yes |
||
CRGPS |
Educational |
67-71 |
65-67 |
64-67 |
63-65 |
70 |
63-71 |
70/65^ |
Yes |
Yes |
||
FQ# |
Residential |
72-75 |
71-72 |
69-72 |
68-71 |
-- |
68-75 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
CUL |
Residential |
61-74 |
63-73 |
64-65 |
63-66 |
64 |
60-74 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
P7# |
Residential |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
73 |
73 |
75 |
No |
No |
||
Note: Bold figures denotes the predicted noise level is higher than the relevant daytime construction noise criteria
(*)The remaining part of the underpass
would be carried out between 2022 and 2030 after demolition of the TST Fire
Station. The noise level of Express Rail Link, Road Works at West Kowloon and Proposed Road Improvement Works in West Kowloon
Reclamation Development have been taken into account in the predicted
noise level. The predicted noise level shown is the overall cumulative noise
level.
(**) The predicted noise levels of construction of permanent underpass are taken from that of excluded area construction between year 2022 and year 2030 in Appendix 4.10i.
(^)
Criteria for examination period
(#)
MTR confirmed that the residential development next to Austin Station will be
occupied in middle of 2015.
FQ will be relocated before permanent
underpass construction.
P7 is assumed to be occupied after Year 2017.
Based on the results shown in the table above, the cumulative construction noise impact predicted at the existing NSR AST exceeded the relevant noise criterion for 1 dB(A). The exceedance was identified as contributed by the concurrent XRL and Road Works at West Kowloon projects and the noise from this Project is only 66 dB(A). All practicable mitigation measures including movable barrier, enclosure, insulating fabric and quiet plants have been proposed and exhausted to minimise the noise impact. However, NSR AST would still be subject to residual impact which contributed dominantly by concurrent projects.
Residual cumulative construction noise impact was predicted at two educational NSR, namely “LCS” and “CRGPS” during normal school period. The predicted exceendances for these NSRs are 1-2 dB(A) and 1 dB(A) respectively during normal school periods. The exceedance was identified as dominantly contributed by the concurrent XRL and Road Works at West Kowloon projects and the noise from this Project is only 68 dB(A) at both NSRs. All practicable mitigation measures including movable barrier, enclosure, insulating fabric and quiet plants have been proposed and exhausted to minimise the noise impact.
According to the website of Lai Chack Middle School, March, June and December are examination periods. The CRGPS has been assumed same months as the examination periods. During the examination periods, the predicted exceendances for these NSRs are 1-5 dB(A). All practicable mitigation measures including movable barrier, enclosure, insulating fabric and quiet plants have been proposed and exhausted to minimise the noise impact. In addition, it is noted that noise insulation works have been installed at this two schools and therefore significant noise impact would not be anticipated.
Exceedances of the traffic noise criteria were found at NSRs P3b, P5, P9, VT1 and LCS. However, the exceedances were identified as dominantly contributed by the existing roads and the committed Roads Works at West Kowloon. The predicted noise contributions from the proposed roads of this Project to the overall noise impacts are less than 1.0 dB(A) and the road traffic noise levels of the proposed roads are all below relevant noise criteria. Direct noise mitigation measures on the Project road sections are deemed not necessary as they would not be effective in improving the noise environment at the sensitive receivers. The underpass proposed under this WKCD Project is hence not anticipated to have a significant contribution to the overall road traffic noise impact.
Existing
and planned NSRs are likely to have direct line-of-sight to the portal at the junction
of Lin Cheung Road and Austin Road West, the portal of the interim access (i.e.
on
14.4.7.3 Fixed Plant Noise
With the fixed plant properly designed to meet the maximum SWL listed in Table 14.4.13, there would not be any residual impacts predicted. However, it is also recommended that the following noise reduction measures should be considered as far as practicable during design stage:
¡ Choose quieter plant such as those which have been effectively silenced.
¡ Include noise levels specification when ordering new plant (including chillier and E/M equipment).
¡ Locate fixed plant/louvre away from any NSRs as far as practicable.
¡ Locate fixed plant in walled plant rooms or in specially designed enclosures.
¡ Locate noisy machines in a basement or a completely separate building.
¡ Install direct noise mitigation measures including silencers, acoustic louvres and acoustic enclosure where necessary.
¡ Develop and implement a regularly scheduled plant maintenance programme so that equipment is properly operated and serviced in order to maintain a controlled level of noise.
14.4.8 Evaluation of Cumulative and Residual Impacts
14.4.8.1
Construction
Phase
The cumulative construction noise impact predicted at the existing NSR AST exceeded the relevant noise criterion for 1 dB(A) for a duration of 1 month. The exceedance was identified as dominantly contributed by the concurrent XRL and Road Works at West Kowloon projects and the noise from this Project is only 66 dB(A). All practicable mitigation measures including movable barrier, enclosure, insulating fabric and quiet plants have been proposed and exhausted to minimise the noise impact. However, NSR AST would still be subject to residual impact which contributed dominantly by concurrent projects.
Residual construction noise impact was also predicted at two educational NSR, namely “LCS” and “CRGPS” during normal school periods. The predicted exceendance for NSR LCS is 1-2 dB(A) for a duration of 5 months. The predicted exceedance for NSR CRGPS is 1 dB(A) for a duration of 1 month. All practicable mitigation measures including movable barrier, enclosure, insulating fabric and quiet plants have been proposed and exhausted to minimise the noise impact. However, the NSR is educational use and it is noted that noise insulation works have been installed and therefore significant noise impacts are not anticipated.
According to the website of Lai Chack Middle School, March, June and December are examination periods. The CRGPS has been assumed same months as the examination periods. The predicted exceendances for NSR “LCS” and “CRGPS” are 1-5 dB(A) for a duration of 18 months and 16 months respectively. All practicable mitigation measures including movable barrier, enclosure, insulating fabric and quiet plants have been proposed and exhausted to minimise the noise impact. However, the NSR is of educational use and it is noted that noise insulation works have been installed and therefore significant noise impacts would not be anticipated.
The residual impacts during construction phase are assessed in accordance with Section 4.4.3 of the TM-EIAO as shown in Table 14.4.18 below:
Table 14.4.18: Assessment of Residual Impacts during Construction Phase
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 |
The predicted exceendance of construction noise for NSR
AST is 1 dB(A). The exceedance was identified as
contributed by the concurrent XRL and Road Works at West Kowloon projects and
the noise from this Project is only 66 dB(A). All practicable mitigation
measures have been proposed and exhausted to minimise the noise impact. However,
NSR AST would still be subject to residual impact which contributed
dominantly by concurrent projects. The predicted exceendance of construction noise for NSR LCS is 1-2 dB(A) during normal school period and 1-5 dB(A) during examination period. The predicted exceedance for NSR CRGPS is 1 dB(A) during normal school period and 1-5 dB(A) during examination period. All practicable measures have been proposed and exhausted to minimise the noise impact. In addition, it is noted that noise insulation works have been installed at this two schools and therefore significant noise impact would not be anticipated. |
Geographic
extent of the adverse environmental impact |
The geographic extent of the adverse impacts from noise
is anticipated to be limited to one residential use at Austin Road West and two
educational uses at Canton Road. |
Duration
and frequency of the adverse environmental impacts |
The predicted exceendance duration of construction noise
for NSR AST is 1 month. The predicted exceendance duration of construction
noise for NSR LCS is 5 months during normal school period and 18 months
during examination period. The predicted exceedance duration for NSR CRGPS is
1 month during normal school period and 16 months for examination period. All
practicable measures have been proposed and exhausted to minimise the noise
impact. All the construction noise exceendance is temporary and reversible |
Likely
size of the community or the environmental that may be affected by the
adverse impacts |
One residential at Austin Road West and two educational
uses at Canton Road would be temporarily affected by residual construction
noise. |
Degree
to which the adverse environmental impacts are reversible or irreversible |
Construction phase impact should be reversible. |
Ecological
context |
Not Applicable in noise section |
Degree
of disruption to sites of cultural heritage |
Not Applicable in noise section |
International
and regional importance |
The impacts are localized and not of international and
regional importance |
Likelihood
and degree of uncertainty of adverse environmental impact |
The impacts predicted are based upon worst case
assumptions and as such, would not occur to the extent predicted on all
occasions. |
Base on the above information, the potential construction phase residual impacts have been assessed to be acceptable in view of the nature, magnitude, duration, and frequency of the noise impacts as well as the conservative assessment results.
14.4.8.2 Operation Phase
Exceedances
of the traffic noise criteria were found at NSRs P3b, P5, P9, VT1 and LCS. The
exceedances were identified as dominantly contributed by the existing roads and the committed
RWWK project. The predicted noise contributions from the proposed underpass to
the overall noise levels at all representative NSRs would be less than 1.0
dB(A) and the road noise levels of the underpass are all be below the relevant
noise criteria. Direct noise mitigation measures on the Project road sections
are deemed not necessary as they would be ineffective in improving the noise
environment at the sensitive receivers. No adverse impacts arising from the proposed
underpass would be predicted at any of the representative NSRs. With
implementations of proposed noise mitigation measures such as underpass with
sound-absorbing materials, adverse road traffic noise impact is not
anticipated.
Adverse fixed plant noise impact is not anticipated. In order to ensure compliance of the operational noise level with the stipulated noise standards in TM, noise commissioning tests for all major fixed noise sources should be included in the Contract Document.
14.4.9 Environmental Monitoring and Audit
14.4.9.1 Construction Phase
Residual airborne noise impact is predicted during the construction phase. To ensure that the nearby NSRs will not be subject to unacceptable construction noise impact, an Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) is recommended. Details on the noise monitoring requirements, methodology and action plans would be described in a separate EM&A Manual.
14.4.9.2 Operation Phase
No adverse road traffic noise impacts are anticipated from the operation of the Project, hence no
environmental monitoring and audit is proposed.
Prior to the operation phase of the Project, as part of the design process, commissioning tests should be conducted to ensure the operational noise from the fixed plant within WKCD would comply with the relevant EIAO-TM noise criteria.
14.4.10 Conclusion
14.4.10.1 Construction Phase
The construction phase noise impact
assessment has been made based on the best available information, taking into
account other expected concurrent projects. Having exhausted practicable mitigation
measures in the form of quiet plant, movable noise barrier, enclosure and insulting
fabric, the construction noise levels at most of the representative NSRs are
predicted to comply with the noise standards stipulated in the EIAO-TM. The cumulative construction noise impact
predicted at one existing residential development at Austin Road West would
exceed the relevant noise criterion by 1 dB(A) for a duration of 1 month. The
exceedance was identified as dominantly contributed by the concurrent XRL and Road Works at West Kowloon projects and
the noise from this Project is only 66 dB(A). Residual construction noise
impacts are also predicted at two
representative NSRs of educational use at
14.4.10.2 Operation Phase
The potential road traffic noise impacts have been assessed based on the peak traffic flows in 2032. The exceedances were identified as dominantly contributed by the surrounding existing roads and the committed RWWK project road sections. The predicted noise contributions from the proposed roads of this Project are less than 1.0 dB(A) at those affected NSRs and the road traffic noise levels of the proposed roads are all below the relevant noise criteria. Direct noise mitigation measures on the Project road sections are deemed not necessary as they would be ineffective in improving the noise environment at the sensitive receivers. No adverse noise impacts arising from the proposed underpass are predicted at any of the representative NSRs.
Noise impact from the planned fixed plants could be effectively mitigated by implementing noise control measures at sources during the detailed design stage. With the adoption of the proposed maximum allowable SWLs of the proposed fixed plant, the impact noise levels at all selected NSRs would comply with the relevant noise criteria for the daytime, evening time and night time periods. Therefore, significant fixed plant noise impact to the existing NSRs is not anticipated.
This section presents an assessment of potential water quality impacts which may arise from the construction and operational stages of underpass road for the WKCD. Recommendations for mitigation measures have been made, where necessary, to minimise the identified water quality impacts to an acceptable level.
14.5.1 Water Quality Legislations, Standards and Guidelines
The criteria for evaluating water quality impacts include the following:
¡ 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); and
¡ Practice Note for Professional Persons on Construction Site Drainage (ProPECC Note PN 1/94).
14.5.1.1 Water Pollution Control Ordinance (WPCO)
The Water Pollution Control Ordinance (WPCO) (Cap. 358) provides the statutory framework for the protection and control of water quality in Hong Kong. According to the WPCO and its subsidiary legislation, Hong Kong waters are divided into ten Water Control Zones (WCZs). Water Quality Objectives (WQOs) were established to protect the beneficial uses of water quality in WCZs. Specific WQOs are applied to each WCZ. The proposed underpass road for the WKCD development is located within the Victoria Harbour, Western Buffer and Eastern Buffer WCZs and their corresponding WQOs are listed in Tables 14.5.1, 14.5.2 and 14.5.3 respectively. The WQOs for the aforementioned WCZs had been used as the basis for assessment of water quality impacts.
Table 14.5.1: Water Quality Objectives for
Parameters |
Objectives |
Sub-Zone |
Offensive Odour, Tints |
Not to be present |
Whole zone |
Colour |
Not to exceed 50 Hazen units, due to human activity |
Inland waters |
Visible foam, oil scum, litter |
Not to be present |
Whole zone |
E. coli |
Not to exceed 1000 per 100mL, calculated as the geometric mean of the most recent 5 consecutive samples taken at intervals of between 7 and 21 days |
Inland waters |
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) within 2 m of the seabed |
Not less than 2
mg L-1 for 90% of the
sampling occasions during the whole year |
Marine waters |
Depth-averaged DO |
Not less than 4
mg L-1 for 90% of the
sampling occasions during the whole year; values should be calculated as the
annual water column average (expressed normally as the arithmetic mean of at
least 3 measurements at 1m below surface, mid depth and 1m above the seabed.
However in water of a depth of 5m of less the mean shall be that of 2
measurements – 1m below surface and 1m above seabed,
and in water of less than 3m the 1m below surface sample only shall apply.) |
Marine waters |
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) |
Not less than 4 mg L-1 |
Inland waters |
pH |
To be in the range of 6.5 - 8.5, change due to human activity not to exceed 0.2 |
Marine waters |
Salinity |
Change due to human activity not to exceed 10% of ambient |
Whole zone |
Temperature |
Change due to human activity not to exceed 2 oC |
Whole zone |
Suspended Solids (SS) |
Not to raise the ambient level by 30% caused by human activity |
Marine waters |
|
Annual median not to exceed 25 mgL-1 due to human activity |
Inland waters |
Unionised Ammonia (UIA) |
Annual mean not to exceed 0.021 mg L-1 as unionised form |
Whole zone |
Nutrients |
Shall not cause excessive algal growth |
Marine waters |
|
Annual mean depth-averaged inorganic nitrogen not to exceed 0.4 mg L-1 |
Marine waters |
BOD5 |
Not to exceed 5 mg L-1 |
Inland waters |
|
Not to exceed 30 mg L-1 |
Inland waters |
Toxic substances |
Should not attain such levels as to produce significant toxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic or teratogenic effects in humans, fish or any other aquatic organisms. |
Whole zone |
|
Human activity should not cause a risk to any beneficial use of the aquatic environment. |
Whole zone |
Source: Statement of Water Quality Objectives (
Table 14.5.2: Water Quality Objectives for the Western Buffer WCZ
Parameters |
Objectives |
Sub-Zone |
Offensive Odour, Tints |
Not to be present |
Whole zone |
Colour |
Not to exceed 30 Hazen units, due to human activity |
Water gathering ground subzones |
|
Not to exceed 50 Hazen units, due to human activity |
Other inland waters |
Visible foam, oil scum, litter |
Not to be present |
Whole zone |
E. coli |
Not to exceed 610 per 100 mL, calculated as the geometric mean of all samples collected in a calendar year |
Secondary contact recreation subzones and Fish culture subzones |
|
Not to exceed 180
per 100 mL, calculated as the geometric mean of all samples collected from
March to October inclusive in 1 calendar year. Samples should be taken at
least 3 times in 1 calendar month at intervals of between 3 and 14 days |
Recreation subzones |
|
Less than 1 per 100 mL, calculated as the geometric mean of the most recent 5 consecutive samples taken at intervals of between 7 and 21 days |
Water gathering ground subzones |
|
Not to exceed 1000 per 100 mL, calculated as the geometric mean of the most recent 5 consecutive samples taken at intervals of between 7 and 21 days |
Other Inland waters |
Depth-averaged Dissolved Oxygen (DO) |
Not less than 4
mg L-1 for 90% of the
sampling occasions during the whole year; values should be calculated as
water column average (arithmetic mean of at least 3 measurements at 1m below
surface, mid-depth and 1m above seabed) |
Marine waters except Fish culture subzones |
|
Not less than 5 mg L-1 for 90% of the sampling occasions during the year; values should be calculated as water column average (arithmetic mean of at least 3 measurements at 1m below surface, mid-depth and 1m above seabed) |
Fish culture subzones |
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) within 2 m of the seabed |
Not less than 2
mg L-1 for 90% of the
sampling occasions during the whole year |
Marine waters and Fish culture subzones |
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) |
Not less than 4 mg L-1 |
Water gathering ground subzones and other inland waters |
pH |
To be in the range of 6.5 - 8.5, change due to human activity not to exceed 0.2 |
Marine waters |
|
Not to exceed the range of 6.0 – 8.5 due to human activity |
Water gathering ground subzones |
|
Not to exceed the range of 6.0 - 9.0 due to human activity |
Other inland waters |
Salinity |
Change due to human activity not to exceed 10% of ambient |
Whole zone |
Temperature |
Change due to human activity not to exceed 2 oC |
Whole zone |
Suspended Solids (SS) |
Not to raise the
ambient level by 30% caused by human activity and shall not accumulate
to affect aquatic communities |
Marine waters |
|
Annual median not to exceed 20 mg L-1 due to human activity |
Water gathering ground subzones |
|
Annual median not to exceed 25 mg L-1 due to human activity |
Other inland waters |
Unionised ammonia (UIA) |
Annual mean not to exceed 0.021 mg L-1 as unionised form |
Whole zone |
Nutrients |
Shall not cause excessive algal growth |
Marine waters |
|
Annual mean depth-averaged inorganic nitrogen not to exceed 0.4 mg L-1 |
Marine waters |
5-day
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) |
Not to exceed 3 mg L-1 |
Water gathering ground subzones |
|
Not to exceed 5 mg L-1 |
Other inland waters |
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) |
Not to exceed 15 mg L-1 |
Water gathering ground subzones |
|
Not to exceed 30 mg L-1 |
Other inland waters |
Toxic substances |
Should not attain such levels as to produce significant toxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic or teratogenic effects in humans, fish or any other aquatic organisms. |
Whole zone |
|
Human activity should not cause a risk to any beneficial use of the aquatic environment. |
Whole zone |
Source: Statement of Water Quality Objectives (Western Buffer Water Control Zone).
Table 14.5.3: Water Quality Objectives for the Eastern Buffer WCZ
Parameters |
Objectives |
Sub-Zone |
Offensive Odour, Tints |
Not to be present |
Whole zone |
Visible foam, oil scum, litter |
Not to be present |
Whole zone |
Dissolved oxygen (DO) within 2m of the seabed |
Not less than 2 mg L-1 for 90% of the sampling occasions during the whole year |
Marine waters and Fish culture subzones |
Depth-averaged DO |
Not less than 4 mg L-1 for 90% of the sampling occasions during the whole year; values should be calculated as water column average (arithmetic mean of at least 3 measurements at 1m below surface, mid-depth and 1m above seabed) |
Marine waters excepting fish culture subzones |
|
Not less than 5 mg L-1 for 90% of the sampling occasions during the year; values should be calculated as water column average (arithmetic mean of at least 3 measurements at 1m below surface, mid-depth and 1m above seabed) |
Fish culture subzones |
|
Not less than 4 mg L-1 |
Water gathering ground subzone and other inland waters |
5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) |
Not to exceed 3 mg L-1 |
Water gathering ground subzones |
|
Not to exceed 5 mg L-1 |
Other inland waters |
Chemical oxygen demand (COD) |
Not to exceed 15 mg L-1 |
Water gathering ground subzones |
|
Not to exceed 30 mg L-1 |
Other inland waters |
pH |
To be in the range of 6.5 – 8.5, change due to human activity not to exceed 0.2 |
Marine waters |
|
To be in the range of 6.5 – 8.5 |
Water gathering ground subzones |
|
To be in the range of 6.0 – 9.0 |
Other inland waters |
Salinity |
Change due to waste discharges not to exceed 10% of ambient |
Whole zone |
Temperature |
Change due to waste discharges not to exceed 2 oC |
Whole zone |
Suspended solids (SS) |
Not to raise the ambient level by 30% caused by human activity and shall not accumulate to affect aquatic communities |
Marine waters |
|
Change due to human activity not to exceed 20 mg L-1 of annual median |
Water gathering ground subzones |
|
Change due to human activity not to exceed 25 mg L-1 of annual median |
Other inland waters |
Unionized ammonia (UIA) |
Annual mean not to exceed 0.021mg L-1 as unionized form |
Whole zone |
Nutrients |
Shall not cause excessive algal growth |
Marine waters |
|
Annual mean depth-averaged inorganic nitrogen not to exceed 0.4 mg L-1 |
Marine waters |
Toxic substances |
Should not attain such levels as to produce significant toxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic or teratogenic effects in humans, fish or any other aquatic organisms. |
Whole zone |
|
Human activity should not cause a risk to any beneficial use of the aquatic environment |
Whole zone |
E. coli |
Not exceed 610 per 100mL, calculated as the geometric mean of all samples collected in one calendar year |
Fish culture subzones |
|
Less than 1 per 100mL, calculated as the geometric mean of the most recent 5 consecutive samples taken at intervals of between 7 and 21 days |
Water gathering ground subzones |
|
Not exceed 1000 per 100mL, calculated as the geometric mean of the most recent 5 consecutive samples taken at intervals of between 7 and 21 days |
Other inland waters |
Colour |
Change due to human activity not to exceed 30 Hazen units |
Water gathering ground |
|
Change due to human activity not to exceed 50 Hazen units |
Other inland waters |
Source: Statement of
Water Quality Objectives (Eastern Buffer Water Control Zone).
Discharges
of effluents are subject to control under the WPCO. The Technical Memorandum on Standards for Effluents Discharged into
Drainage and Sewerage Systems, Inland and Coastal Waters (TM-DSS) sets
limits for effluent discharges. Specific limits apply for different areas and
are different between surface waters and sewers. The limits vary with the rate
of effluent flow. Sewage from the proposed construction activities should
comply with the standards for effluent discharged into foul sewers, inshore
waters or marine waters of the
14.5.1.3
Practice
Note for Professional Persons on Construction Site Drainage (ProPECC Note PN
1/94)
A practice note for professional persons was issued by the EPD to provide guidelines for handling and disposal of construction site discharges. The Practice Note for Professional Persons on Construction Site Drainage (ProPECC Note PN 1/94) provides good practice guidelines for dealing with various types of discharge from a construction site. Practices outlined in ProPECC Note PN 1/94 should be followed as far as possible during construction to minimize the water quality impact due to construction site drainage.
14.5.2 Assessment Area, Water Sensitive Receivers and Baseline Conditions
14.5.2.1 Assessment Area
Water
quality impact assessment had been carried out in the
14.5.2.2 Water Sensitive Receivers
Key water sensitive receivers that may potentially be affected by the proposed underpass road include:
¡ Yau Ma Tei Typhoon Shelter;
¡ WSD Flushing Water Intakes;
¡ Cooling Water Intakes; and
¡ Fish Culture Zones.
Locations of the key water sensitive receivers are shown in Figure 14.5.2.
14.5.2.3 Baseline Conditions
Marine
Water Quality in
A summary of marine water quality data for EPD monitoring stations at Victoria Harbour (VM6 and 7), and Stonecutters Island (VM15) extracted from EPD’s publication “Marine Water Quality in Hong Kong 2010” are presented in Table 14.5.4. Locations of these monitoring stations are shown in Figure 14.5.1.
Table 14.5.4: Marine Water Quality at
Parameter |
Monitoring Station |
||
|
|
(West) |
|
|
VM6 |
VM7 |
VM15 |
Temperature (oC) |
23.2 (16.6 – 27.7) |
23.0 (17.9 – 27.2) |
23.4 (16.8 – 27.6) |
Salinity |
31.4 (28.8 – 33.4) |
31.2 (26.1 – 33.3) |
31.0 (26.7 – 33.5) |
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) |
5.2 (3.6 – 6.5) |
5.8 (4.5 – 7.5) |
5.5 (3.9 – 6.3) |
Dissolved Oxygen (Bottom) (mg/L) |
4.2 (1.9 – 5.2) |
5.6 (3.4 – 7.0) |
4.8 (1.3 – 6.4) |
pH |
7.9 (7.6 – 8.2) |
7.9 (7.6 – 8.2) |
7.9 (7.6 – 8.2) |
Secchi Disc Depth (m) |
2.7 (1.0 – 5.2) |
2.7 (1.7 – 4.0) |
2.4 (1.2 – 3.6) |
Turbidity (NTU) |
3.1 (1.0 – 5.5) |
3.5 (1.0 – 6.6) |
3.7 (1.3 – 7.5) |
Suspended Solids (mg/L) |
3.5 (1.0 – 6.9) |
3.8 (1.6 – 5.6) |
4.2 (1.3 – 8.7) |
BOD5 (mg/L) |
1.0 (0.6 – 1.7) |
1.0 (0.5 – 1.8) |
0.9 (0.5 – 2.0) |
Ammonia Nitrogen (mg/L) |
0.177 (0.109 – 0.310) |
0.163 (0.090 – 0.293) |
0.199 (0.114 – 0.333) |
Unionised Ammonia (mg/L) |
0.006 (0.002 – 0.018) |
0.005 (0.002 – 0.014) |
0.007 (0.002 – 0.021) |
Nitrite Nitrogen (mg/L) |
0.031 (0.009 – 0.053) |
0.034 (0.016 – 0.078) |
0.034 (0.012 – 0.057) |
Nitrate Nitrogen (mg/L) |
0.141 (0.051 – 0.270) |
0.157 (0.068 – 0.347) |
0.147 (0.046 – 0.307) |
Total Inorganic Nitrogen (mg/L) |
0.35 (0.19 – 0.51) |
0.35 (0.20 – 0.49) |
0.38 (0.18 – 0.62) |
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/L) |
0.32 (0.23 – 0.47) |
0.35 (0.25 – 0.48) |
0.34 (0.23 – 0.47) |
Total Nitrogen (mg/L) |
0.49 (0.30 – 0.67) |
0.55 (0.45 – 0.65) |
0.53 (0.29 – 0.73) |
Orthophosphate Phosphorus (mg/L) |
0.030 (0.017 – 0.048) |
0.025 (0.008 – 0.039) |
0.031 (0.016 – 0.046) |
Total Phosphorus (mg/L) |
0.05 (0.03 – 0.06) |
0.05 (0.04 – 0.06) |
0.05 (0.04 – 0.06) |
Silica (SiO2) (mg/L) |
0.91 (0.36 – 1.80) |
0.81 (0.13 – 2.13) |
0.93 (0.16 – 1.87) |
Chlorophyll-a (µg/L) |
3.3 (0.3 – 15.6) |
5.0 (0.4 – 13.7) |
4.1 (0.2 – 21.8) |
E.coli (count/100mL) |
4400 (550 – 13000) |
2800 (520 – 16000) |
1800 (430 – 5900) |
Faecal Coliforms (count/100mL) |
11000 (1300 – 29000) |
6100 (1000 – 28000) |
4600 (880 – 28000) |
Notes: Unless otherwise specified, data represented are depth-averaged (A) values calculated by taking the means of three depths: Surface (S), Mid-depth (M), Bottom (B) Data presented are annual arithmetic means the depth-averaged results except for E.coli and faecal coliforms which are annual geometric means. Data in brackets indicated the ranges. |
Marine Water Quality in Yau Ma Tei Typhoon Shelter
A summary of marine water quality data for EPD monitoring stations at Yau Ma Tei Typhoon Shelter (VT10) extracted from EPD’s publication “Marine Water Quality in Hong Kong 2010” are presented in Table 14.5.5. Location of this monitoring station is shown in Figure 14.5.1.
Table 14.5.5: Marine Water Quality at Yau Ma Tei Typhoon Shelter in 2010
Parameter |
Yau Mei Tei |
|
VT10 |
Temperature (oC) |
23.6 (18.2 – 27.9) |
Salinity |
30.8 (29.1 – 31.8) |
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) |
4.1 (1.6 – 5.1) |
Dissolved Oxygen (Bottom) (mg/L) |
4.5 (3.1 – 5.6) |
pH |
7.7 (7.5 – 7.8) |
Secchi Disc Depth (m) |
1.8 (1.0 – 2.7) |
Turbidity (NTU) |
5.9 (1.3 – 13.6) |
Suspended Solids (mg/L) |
6.9 (2.8 – 15.5) |
BOD5 (mg/L) |
1.3 (1.0 – 1.8) |
Ammonia Nitrogen (mg/L) |
0.309 (0.193 – 0.450) |
Unionised Ammonia (mg/L) |
0.006 (0.003 – 0.011) |
Nitrite Nitrogen (mg/L) |
0.038 (0.023 – 0.050) |
Nitrate Nitrogen (mg/L) |
0.147 (0.097 – 0.200) |
Total Inorganic Nitrogen (mg/L) |
0.49 (0.37 – 0.64) |
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/L) |
0.50 (0.41 – 0.66) |
Total Nitrogen (mg/L) |
0.68 (0.59 – 0.85) |
Orthophosphate Phosphorus (mg/L) |
0.040 (0.024 – 0.051) |
Total Phosphorus (mg/L) |
0.06 (0.04 – 0.07) |
Silica
(as SiO2) (mg/L) |
0.83 (0.12 – 1.23) |
Chlorophyll-a (µg/L) |
6.6 (0.8 – 21.3) |
E.coli (count/100mL) |
2800 (1500 – 35000) |
Faecal Coliforms (count/100mL) |
7400 (2700 – 71000) |
Notes: Unless otherwise specified, data represented are depth-averaged (A) values calculated by taking the means of three depths: Surface (S), Mid-depth (M), Bottom (B) Data presented are annual arithmetic means the depth-averaged results except for E.coli and faecal coliforms which are annual geometric means. Data in brackets indicated the ranges. |
14.5.3 Identification of Water Quality Impact
14.5.3.1 Construction Phase
Potential sources of water quality impact associated with the construction activities for the proposed underpass road for the WKCD development had been identified. These include:
¡ Construction
site runoff and drainage;
¡ Barging
facilities and activities;
¡ Sewage
effluent from construction workforce; and
¡ General
construction activities.
14.5.3.2 Operation Phase
During operation phase, the only potential source of water quality impact associated with operation of the proposed underpass road is road and surface runoff.
14.5.4 Evaluation of Water Quality Impact
14.5.4.1 Construction Phase
Construction site runoff and drainage
Runoff
from the surface construction works areas may contain increased loads of
sediments, other suspended solids (SS) and contaminants. Potential sources of
pollution from site drainage include:
¡ Runoff
from and erosion from site surfaces, drainage channels, earth working areas and
stockpiles;
¡ Release
of any bentonite slurries, concrete washings and other grouting materials with
construction run-off and storm water;
¡ Wash
water from dust suppression sprays and wheel wash facilities; and
¡ Fuel,
oil, solvents and lubricants from maintenance of construction vehicles and mechanical
equipment.
Sediment
laden runoff particularly from works areas subjected to excavation or earth
works, if uncontrolled, may carry pollutants (adsorbed onto the particle
surfaces) into any nearby storm water drains. Bentonite and chemical grouting may
be required for diaphragm walling works and as a result may pollute surface
runoff.
As
a good site practice, mitigation measures should be implemented to control
construction site runoff and drainage from the works areas, and to prevent
runoff and drainage water with high levels of SS from entering any nearby storm
water drains. With the implementation of adequate construction site drainage
and provision of sediment removal facilities, unacceptable water quality
impacts are not anticipated. The construction phase discharge would be
collected by the temporary drainage system installed by the Contractor and then
treated or desilted on-site before discharge to storm water drains. The
Contractor would be required to obtain a license from EPD under the WPCO for
discharge to the public drainage system.
Barging facilities and activities
Barging
point facilities of the Hong Kong
Section of
Sewage effluent from construction workforce
Domestic
sewage would be generated from the workforce during construction phase.
However, portable chemical toilets should be installed within the construction
site. The Contractor has the responsibility to ensure that chemical toilets are
used and properly maintained, and that licensed Contractors are employed to
collect and dispose of the waste off-site at approved locations. Therefore,
water quality impact is not anticipated.
General construction activities
On-site
construction activities may result in water pollution from the following:
¡ Uncontrolled
discharge of debris and rubbish such as packaging, construction materials and
refuse; and
¡ Spillages
of liquids stored on-site, such as oil, diesel and solvents etc.
Good
construction and site management practices should be observed to ensure that
litter, fuels and solvents do not enter the public drainage system.
14.5.4.2 Operation Phase
Road and surface runoff
Surface runoff from the underpass
road proposed under the WKCD development may be contaminated by oils leaked
from passing vehicles. It is considered that impacts upon water quality
would be minimal provided that the proposed underpass road is designed with
adequate drainage systems and appropriate oil interceptors, as required in
accordance with Highways Department
Guidance Notes RD/GN/035 – Road Pavement Drainage Design.
14.5.5 Mitigation of Adverse Impacts
14.5.5.1 Construction Phase
Construction site runoff and drainage
The
site practices outlined in ProPECC Note PN 1/94 should be followed as far as
practicable in order to minimise surface runoff and the chance of erosion. The
following measures are recommended to protect water quality and sensitive uses
of the coastal area, and when properly implemented should be sufficient to
adequately control site discharges so as to avoid water quality impacts:
¡ At
the start of site establishment, perimeter cut-off drains to direct off-site
water around the site should be constructed with internal drainage works and
erosion and sedimentation control facilities implemented. Channels, earth bunds
or sand bag barriers should be provided on site to direct storm water to silt
removal facilities. The design of the temporary on-site drainage system should
be undertaken by the WKCDA’s Contractor prior to the commencement of
construction;
¡ Sand/silt
removal facilities such as sand/silt traps and sediment basins should be
provided to remove sand/silt particles from runoff to meet the requirements of
the TM standards under the WPCO. The
design of efficient silt removal facilities should be based on the guidelines
in Appendix A1 of ProPECC Note PN 1/94.
Sizes may vary depending upon the flow rate. The detailed design of the
sand/silt traps should be undertaken by the WKCDA’s Contractor prior to the
commencement of construction.
¡ All
drainage facilities and erosion and sediment control structures should be
regularly inspected and maintained to ensure proper and efficient operation at
all times and particularly during rainstorms. Deposited silt and grit should be
regularly removed, at the onset of and after each rainstorm to ensure that these
facilities are functioning properly at all times.
¡ Measures
should be taken to minimize the ingress of site drainage into excavations. If
excavation of trenches in wet periods is necessary, they should be dug and
backfilled in short sections wherever practicable. Water pumped out from
foundation excavations should be discharged into storm drains via silt removal
facilities.
¡ All
vehicles and plant should be cleaned before leaving a construction site to
ensure no earth, mud, debris and the like is deposited by them on roads. An
adequately designed and sited wheel washing facility should be provided at
construction site exit where practicable. Wash-water should have sand and silt
settled out and removed regularly to ensure the continued efficiency of the process.
The section of access road leading to, and exiting from, the wheel-wash bay to
the public road should be paved with sufficient backfall toward the wheel-wash
bay to prevent vehicle tracking of soil and silty water to public roads and
drains.
¡ Open
stockpiles of construction materials or construction wastes on-site should be
covered with tarpaulin or similar fabric during rainstorms. Measures should be
taken to prevent the washing away of construction materials, soil, silt or
debris into any drainage system.
¡ Manholes
(including newly constructed ones) should be adequately covered and temporarily
sealed so as to prevent silt, construction materials or debris being washed
into the drainage system and stormwater runoff being directed into foul sewers.
¡ Precautions
should be taken at any time of the year when rainstorms are likely. Actions
should be taken when a rainstorm is imminent or forecasted and actions to be
taken during or after rainstorms are summarized in Appendix A2 of ProPECC Note
PN 1/94. Particular attention should be
paid to the control of silty surface runoff during storm events, especially for
areas located near steep slopes.
¡ Bentonite
slurries used in piling or slurry walling should be reconditioned and reused
wherever practicable. Temporary enclosed storage locations should be provided
on-site for any unused bentonite that needs to be transported away after all
the related construction activities are completed. The requirements in ProPECC
Note PN 1/94 should be adhered to in the handling and disposal of bentonite
slurries.
Barging facilities and activities
¡ all
vessels should be sized so that adequate clearance is maintained between
vessels and the seabed in all tide conditions, to ensure that undue turbidity
is not generated by turbulence from vessel movement or propeller wash;
¡ loading of barges and
hoppers should be controlled to prevent splashing of material into the
surrounding water. Barges or hoppers
should not be filled to a level that will cause the overflow of materials or
polluted water during loading or transportation;
¡ all
hopper barges should be fitted with tight fitting seals to their bottom
openings to prevent leakage of material; and
¡ construction activities should
not cause foam, oil, grease, scum, litter or other objectionable matter to be
present on the water within the site.
Sewage effluent from construction workforce
Temporary
sanitary facilities, such as portable chemical toilets, should be employed
on-site where necessary to handle sewage from the workforce. A licensed
contractor should be employed to provide appropriate and adequate portable
toilets and be responsible for appropriate disposal and maintenance.
General construction activities
Construction
solid waste, debris and refuse generated on-site should be collected, handled
and disposed of properly to avoid entering any nearby storm water drain.
Stockpiles of cement and other construction materials should be kept covered
when not being used.
Oils
and fuels should only be stored in designated areas which have pollution
prevention facilities. To prevent spillage of fuels and solvents to any nearby
storm water drain, all fuel tanks and storage areas should be provided with
locks and be sited on sealed areas, within bunds of a capacity equal to 110% of
the storage capacity of the largest tank. The bund should be drained of
rainwater after a rain event.
14.5.5.2 Operational Phase
Road and surface runoff
For operation of the proposed underpass road, a surface water drainage system would be provided to collect road and surface runoff. It is recommended that the road drainage should be provided with adequately designed silt trap and oil interceptors, as necessary. The design of the operation phase mitigation measures for the underpass road should take into account the guidelines published in the Practice Note for Professional Persons on Drainage Plans Subject to Comment by the Environmental Protection Department (ProPECC Note PN 5/93) and Highways Department Guidance Notes RD/GN/035 – Road Pavement Drainage Design.
14.5.6 Evaluation of Cumulative and Residual Impacts
Provided that proper mitigation measures would be implemented by each of the concurrent projects such as XRL, no adverse cumulative land-based and marine-based water quality impacts would be expected.
With the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures for the construction and operation phases of the proposed underpass road, no residual water quality impact is anticipated.
14.5.7 Water Quality Monitoring and Audit
Adverse
water quality impact was not predicted during the construction and operation
phases of the proposed underpass road. Nevertheless, appropriate mitigation
measures are recommended to minimize potential water quality impacts.
Water
quality monitoring is recommended to obtain a robust, defensible database of
baseline information of marine water quality before construction, and
thereafter, to monitor any variation of water quality from the baseline
conditions and exceedances of WQOs at sensitive receivers during construction
and to ensure the recommended mitigation measures are properly implemented.
Regular
audit of the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures during the
construction phase at the work areas should also be undertaken to ensure the
recommended mitigation measures are properly implemented.
Details of the water quality monitoring and audit programme and the Event and Action Plan are provided in the stand-alone EM&A Manual.
14.5.8 Conclusion
14.5.8.1 Construction Phase
The key issue in terms of water quality during the construction phase of the underpass road would be the potential for release of wastewater into coastal waters from construction site runoff and drainage.
Deterioration in water quality could be minimised to acceptable levels through implementing adequate mitigation measures such as control measures on suspended solids release, on-site runoff and drainage from the works areas to minimise suspended solids spillage and construction runoff prior to discharge. Proper site management and good housekeeping practices would also be required to ensure that construction wastes and other construction-related materials would not enter the public drainage system and coastal waters. Sewage effluent arising from the construction workforce would also be handled through provision of portable toilets.
With the implementation of these recommended mitigation measures, no unacceptable impacts on water quality from the construction works for the underpass road are anticipated. Water quality monitoring and site inspections during construction phase should be undertaken routinely to inspect the construction activities and works areas to ensure the recommended mitigation measures are properly implemented.
14.5.8.2 Operation Phase
Surface runoff from the proposed underpass
road may be contaminated by oils leaked from passing vehicles. It is
considered that impacts upon water quality will be acceptable provided that the
proposed underpass road is designed with adequate drainage systems and
appropriate oil interceptors, as required.
14.6 Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Implication
The underpass road is part of a network of infrastructure within the WKCD development to meet the connectivity and accessibility requirements of the WKCD. This Schedule 2 Designated Project does not require or generate any sewage or sewerage related facilities. Consequently, there are no sewerage and sewage treatment implications associated with the underpass road.
Sewerage and sewage treatment implications associated with the other WKCD facilities is presented in Section 6.
14.7 Waste Management Implication
14.7.1 Waste Management Legislations, Standards and Guidelines
The criteria and guidelines for assessing
waste management implications are outlined respectively in Annexes 7 and 15 of
the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM).
The following legislation relates to the
handling, treatment and disposal of wastes in
¡ Waste Disposal Ordinance (Cap. 354)
¡ Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation (Cap. 354C)
¡ Waste Disposal (Charges for Disposal of Construction Waste) Regulation (Cap. 354N)
¡ Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap. 132) - Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances Regulation
¡ Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28)
¡ Dumping at Sea Ordinance (Cap. 466)
The Waste Disposal Ordinance (WDO) prohibits the unauthorised disposal of wastes. Construction waste is defined as any substance, matter or thing that is generated from construction work and abandoned, whether or not it has been processed or stockpiled before being abandoned, but does not include any sludge, screenings or matter removed in or generated from any desludging, desilting or dredging works. Under the WDO, wastes can be disposed of only at designated waste disposal facilities.
Under the WDO, the Chemical Waste (General) Regulation provides regulations for chemical waste control, and administers the possession, storage, collection, transport and disposal of chemical wastes. The Environmental Protection Department (EPD) has also issued a ‘guideline’ document, the Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes (1992), which details how the Contractor should comply with the regulations on chemical wastes.
The Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances Regulation provides control on illegal tipping of wastes on unauthorised (unlicensed) sites.
14.7.1.2 Inert Construction and Demolition (C&D) Materials
The current policy related to the dumping of inert C&D materials is documented in the Works Branch Technical Circular No. 2/93, ‘Public Dumps’. Construction and demolition materials that are wholly inert, namely public fill, should not be disposed of to landfill, but taken to public filling areas, which usually form part of reclamation schemes. The Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance requires that dumping licences be obtained by individuals or companies who deliver public fill to public filling areas. The Civil Engineering & Development Department (CEDD) issues the licences under delegated powers from the Director of Lands.
Under the Waste Disposal (Charges for Disposal of Construction Waste) Regulation, enacted in January 2006, construction waste delivered to a landfill for disposal must not contain more than 50% by weight of inert material. Construction waste delivered to a sorting facility for disposal must contain more than 50% by weight of inert material, and construction waste delivered to a public fill reception facility for disposal must consist entirely of inert material.
14.7.1.3 Excavated Sediment
Practice Notes for Authorized Persons, Registered Structural Engineers and Registered Geotechnical Engineers, PNAP No. ADV-21 (Previous Reference: PNAP No. 252) Management Framework for Disposal of Dredged / Excavated Sediment sets out the procedures for seeking approval to dredge/excavate sediment and the management framework for marine disposal of such sediment. Excavated sediment arising from the Project, if any, will be managed in accordance with the requirements of PNAP ADV-21.
In
accordance with the Dumping at Sea Ordinance (DASO), application for dumping permits from EPD is required for
marine disposal of dredged/excavated
sediment, if any.
14.7.2 Assessment Methodology
The criteria for assessing waste management implications are outlined in Annex 7 of the EIAO-TM. The methods for assessing potential waste management impacts during construction and operation phases of the underpass road follow those presented in Annex 15 of the EIAO-TM and include the following:
¡ Identify the quantity, quality and timing of waste arising as a result of the construction and operation activities of the Project.
¡
Assessment of potential impacts from the management
of solid waste with respect to potential hazards, air and odour emissions,
noise, wastewater discharges and public transport.
¡
Assessment of impacts on the capacity of waste
collection, transfer and disposal facilities.
14.7.3 Identification, Prediction and Evaluation of Environmental Impact
The activities to be carried out for construction of the underpass road would generate a variety of wastes that can be divided into different key categories based on their composition and ultimate method of disposal. The identified waste types include:
· Inert Construction and demolition (C&D) materials;
· C&D materials from site clearance;
· Chemical waste; and
· General refuse.
Each type of the above waste arising is described below, together with an evaluation of the potential environmental impacts associated with the waste generation, handling, storage, transport and disposal. It should be noted that no marine sediments would be excavated from the WKCD site.
Construction and Demolition (C&D) Materials
Key sources of Inert C&D materials
The excavation works for WKCD basement
(including the underpass road and the flyover) will be the major source of inert
C&D materials (mainly soil) generated by the Project. It is estimated that
the total amount of inert C&D materials to be generated would be
approximately 1,882,830 m3, in which about 1,837,200 m3 would
be generated from excavation work for the WKCD basement and the remaining 45,630
m3 would be from construction of superstructures and substructures
until 2017. The bulk excavation for the basement will be proceeded
on a zone-by-zone basis from 2013 to 2017, and the construction of superstructures and substructures would be
carried out progressively from 2013 to 2020.
Based on the tentative
construction programme (see Appendix 2.4), the amounts of inert C&D
materials to be generated in different years from 2013 to 2017 have been
estimated as summarized in Table 14.7.1.
While the excavation work at Zone 4 and
construction of superstructure are part of the entire WKCD Project but not part
of this underpass road project, the inert C&D materials associated with
such works will not be segregated for separate handling (i.e., on-site/off-site
reuse and disposal). Hence, all the inert
C&D materials for the entire WKCD Project up to 2017 (the scheduled
completion year of the underpass road) are presented in this section.
Table 14.7.1: Estimates of inert C&D Materials to be Generated by WKCD Project
Year |
Estimated Amount of Inert C&D Materials from WKCD Basement Excavation (m3) |
Estimated Amount of Inert C&D Materials from Construction of Superstructures and Substructures (m3) |
Estimated Total (m3) |
2013 |
17,000 |
7,270 |
24,270 |
2014 |
521,800 |
9,400 |
531,200 |
2015 |
639,400 |
9,600 |
649,000 |
2016 |
405,500 |
9,720 |
415,220 |
2017 |
253,500 |
9,640 |
263,140 |
Total |
1,837,200 |
45,630 |
1,882,830 |
Note: Marine sediments not included in the above
estimates.
The quantity of inert C&D materials to
be generated from construction of superstructures and substructures has been
estimated by applying the generation rate of 0.1m3 per m2
of gross floor area (GFA), which is based on the Reduction of Construction
Waste Final Report published by the
On-site reuse / import of inert C&D
Materials as fill materials
The WKCD development will require fill
material for construction of the Park and the materials are proposed to be
obtained from reuse of the inert C&D materials generated by the Project as
far as practicable. Nevertheless, it is
anticipated that newly imported material will be required, though all
practicable measures will be employed for reuse of the inert C&D materials
generated by the Project before consideration of importing material.
It is estimated that the WKCD Project would require a total of 491,880 m3 of fill materials for construction of the Park from 2013 to 2017. While all practicable measures will be employed for reuse of the inert C&D materials generated by the WKCD Project before consideration of importing material, it is anticipated that about 146,740 m3 of the inert C&D materials generated by the WKCD Project would be reused as the fill material mainly for construction of the Park from 2013 to 2017. Therefore, about 345,140 m3 (491,880 – 146,740 m3) of fill material will need to be imported to this Project, as detailed in Table 14.7.2, whereas about 1,736,090 m3 (1,882,830 – 146,740 m3) of inert C&D materials will require off-site reuse by other projects or disposal during the period from 2013 to 2017. The overall proportion of inert C&D materials to be reused on-site from 2013 to 2017 appears to be relatively low (about 30% of the total amount of fill materials required) chiefly because of the space constraints for stockpiling within the WKCD site, and hence the inert C&D materials generated by the Project would be required to be immediately transported to other available projects for off-site reuse wherever practicable. Nevertheless, subject to the future contractor’s detailed construction programme the amount of inert C&D materials that can actually be reused on-site may be higher than the current estimates.
Table 14.7.2: Estimates of Fill Materials to be Imported from Other Potential Projects and/or Government’s Fill Banks
Year |
Estimated Fill Material required at WKCD (m3) |
Estimated inert C&D Materials to be reused on-site as Fill Material (m3) |
Estimated Fill Materials to be imported from Other Potential Projects and/or Government’s Public Fill Reception Facilities (m3) |
2013 |
54,200 |
8,270 |
45,930 |
2014 |
127,230 |
42,400 |
84,830 |
2015 |
108,200 |
37,500 |
70,700 |
2016 |
96,530 |
32,230 |
64,300 |
2017 |
105,720 |
26,340 |
79,380 |
Total (round up figure) |
491,880 |
146,740 |
345,140 |
Off-site reuse of surplus inert C&D
materials
There will be a number of large
infrastructures projects under construction phase during the period from 2013
to 2017, which are identified as potential users of the excavated inert C&D
materials from the WKCD Project. The
proponents of such projects have been approached to identify the possibility of
using the inert C&D materials from this Project. Based on the feedback from the project
proponents, two potential projects have been identified, namely, the Hong
Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge (HZMB) and the 3rd runway project (copies
of the relevant correspondences attached in Appendix 7.5).
As discussed in the meeting with the
consultant of HZMB project on 31 July 2012, it is possible for the HZMB project
to use the surplus inert C&D materials from this WKCD Project. Based on the
fill demand provided from the contractor of HZMB project, the surplus inert C&D
materials could be delivered to HZMB during the period from December 2013 -
August 2014. Communication mechanism has been established with the HZMB project
consultant, and regular meetings will be conducted with the HZMB project
consultant and contractor for further liaison of logistics arrangement.
Based on the project profile entitled
“Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System”
(i.e., 3rd runway project) available from the EPD’s website, major
construction works of the project, which will involve land formation of about
650 ha, would be expected to commence in mid 2015 and completion of the project
would be expected by end 2022. Verbal
response from the project proponent indicated that provided construction of the
3rd runway project could be commenced as expected in the project profile, it
would be possible for the project to receive the inert C&D materials
generated from this WKCD Project.
According to the information presented in the project profile, it would
be reasonable to anticipate that the 3rd runway project could
receive fill materials for its land formation work from the WKCD Project in
2016 and 2017. Liaison with the project
proponent regarding the arrangement of using the inert C&D materials from
WKCD Project will be made at a later stage when the programme of the 3rd runway
project has become clearer.
In view of the responses received and the
available information, it can be estimated that the total amount of inert C&D
materials to be used by the HZMB project and/or the 3rd runway project in 2013,
2014, 2016 and 2017 would be about 905,000 m3, as detailed in Table 14.7.3
below. In 2015 and after 2017, however,
none of the inert C&D materials generated could be used by either of the
two projects. The actual quantities and arrangement for using the inert C&D
materials from WKCD Project will be subject to the programmes of the two
projects and liaison with the relevant parties.
Table 14.7.3: Estimates of inert C&D Materials to be Used by Other Potential Projects
Year |
Potential user projects of inert C&D
materials |
Estimated quantity of inert C&D
materials that would be used by the projects (m3) |
Assumptions |
2013 |
HZMB |
16,000 |
90% of the
amount of inert C&D materials to be generated in December 2013 (17,800 m3)
would be used by the potential project |
2014 |
HZMB |
278,500 |
90% of the
amount of inert C&D materials to be generated from January to August 2014
(309,400 m3) would be used by the potential project |
2015 |
None |
0 |
Not applicable |
2016 |
3rd runway
project |
373,700 |
90% of the
amount of inert C&D materials to be generated in 2016 (415,220 m3)
would be used by the potential project |
2017 |
3rd runway
project |
236,800 |
90% of the
amount of inert C&D materials to be generated in 2017 (263,140 m3)
would be used by the potential project |
|
Total |
905,000 |
|
During the detailed design stage, further alternative disposal arrangement
(e.g., other potential projects that could receive inert C&D materials from
the WKCD Project) shall be continuously explored and identified. If no
potential projects could receive the surplus inert C&D materials, the
remaining inert C&D materials could be disposed of at the Government's
Public Fill Reception Facilities (PFRFs) for beneficial use by any other
projects in
Off-site disposal of inert C&D materials
From the above
estimates, the amount of inert C&D materials produced from the WKCD Project
that would neither be reused on-site nor be reused by the two potential
projects would be about 831,090 m3 (1,882,830 – 146,740 - 905,000 m3), which will need to be
disposed of at the Government’s Public Fill Reception Facilities (PFRFs) for
beneficial use by other projects in Hong Kong.
Hence, the forecast quantities for yearly generation, on-site reuse,
off-site reuse and disposal of inert C&D materials at PFRFs are as summarised in Table 14.7.4 below.
Table 14.7.4 Estimates of Inert C&D Materials to be Generated, Reused On-site, Reused Off-site and Disposed
Year |
Amount of Inert C&D Materials (m3) |
|||
|
Generation |
On-site Reuse |
Off-site Reuse |
Disposed of at PFRF |
2013 |
24,270 |
8,270 |
16,000 |
0 |
2014 |
531,200 |
42,400 |
278,500 |
210,300 |
2015 |
649,000 |
37,500 |
0 |
611,500 |
2016 |
415,220 |
32,230 |
373,700 |
9,290 |
2017 |
263,140 |
26,340 |
236,800 |
0 |
Total (round up figure) |
1,882,830 |
146,740 |
905,000 |
831,090 |
Liaison with the CEDD Public Fill Committee (PFC) on the allocation of
space for disposal of the inert C&D materials at PFRFs is underway. No construction work is allowed to proceed
until all issues on management of inert C&D materials have been resolved
and all relevant arrangements have been endorsed by the relevant authorities
including PFC and EPD.
It is proposed that four temporary barging
points at the south of the site will
be handed over from the XRL project to WKCD for handling the inert C&D materials of this Project. Dump
trucks will be used for removal
of inert C&D materials generated from construction site to the barging points.
The estimated maximum total handling
volume of inert C&D materials at the four barging points will be 4,000 m3/day. The
indicative locations of the barging points are as shown in Figure 3.4a.
Both land and marine access to the
PFRFs are subject to capacity limitations, and hence quota and booking systems
may be applied in order to ensure the disposal is carried out in controlled
manner. The storage, handling, transport and disposal of surplus inert C&D
materials, if not managed properly, would have the potential to create visual,
water quality and dust impacts.
Therefore, the waste reduction measures and good site practices as
detailed in Section 14.7.4.1 will be
implemented to minimize the amount of surplus inert C&D materials as well
as to prevent or reduce the associated potential impacts.
Review of any excavated marine sediments
Excavation depths at different zones are proposed
to accommodate the underground vehicular traffic and various facilities
including parking, loading & unloading areas and electrical &
mechanical (E&M) plant and locations of the zones are provided in Appendix 7.1. The anticipated excavation levels for
bulk excavation of the basement at different zones are indicated as follows:
Zone 1 : -2.1mPD
Zones 2a and 2b : -6.5mPD
Zone 3 :
-1.1mPD
The WKCD site is a piece of reclaimed
land. Based on the previous reports
available from the Geotechnical Engineering Office and relevant approved EIA
reports, past site investigation had been undertaken for previous projects
within or near the proposed WKCD Project area, including the West Kowloon
Reclamation, MTRC Kowloon Station, Kowloon Southern Link (KSL) and Hong Kong
Section of Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL) projects
etc. In addition, ground investigation
(GI) works were carried out for the WKCD Project for part of its site. Review
of the relevant reports and available GI results for WKCD site has revealed that
excavation of marine sediments is not anticipated at all the aforementioned Zones. Details of the justifications are given
below.
Zone 1
According to the GI completed for the WKCD site at Zone 1 in March 2013,
covering a total of 5 drillholes (A1-A, A2-B, A3-B, A4-A and A5-B), no marine
sediment was encountered in drillholes A2-B, A3-B, A4-A and A5-B whereas a thin
layer of marine sediment was found locally in drillhole A1-A between the depths
of -12.68mPD and -14.73mPD. Details of
the drillhole locations and records are given in Appendix 7.1. Based on the relevant drillhole record no.
KSD100/DHE056 from the EIA report for KSL project (see Appendix 7.1), it was suspected
that marine sediments might be present between the depths of -2.29 mPD and
-7.29 mPD at Zone 1.
Given that the 5 drillhole records (A1-A, A2-B, A3-B, A4-A and A5-B)
show no marine sediments down to -12.68mPD; the presence of marine sediment at
drillhole KSD100/DHE056 (between -2.29 mPD and -7.29 mPD) was not ascertained;
and the proposed excavation level at this Zone is only down to about -2.1 mPD, it is considered that marine deposit would not be excavated at Zone 1.
Zone 2a
The site in Zone 2a was reclaimed in early 2000. This Zone is currently the construction site for the Hong Kong Section of XRL project and the proposed ventilation facilities in West Kowloon Terminus (WKT) were proposed to be built underneath this Zone with approximately -22mPD by excavation (see Appendix 7.2). Sediment was found at certain sections of the proposed WKT with reference to the geological profile information. It is noted in the XRL EIA Report that the construction method for WKT is by cut-and-cover and the sediment is expected to be removed during the construction work. Also, marine deposit is not present outside the zone for proposed WKT with reference to the geological profile information. From the above quoted results, it is considered that marine deposit would not be excavated at Zone 2a.
Zone
2b
The site in this Zone was reclaimed in 1990s. Ground investigation works were carried out at Zone 2b under the project for MTRC Kowloon Station Package 5, 6 and 7 for water cooling system in 2001. The relevant drillhole records (drillhole nos. BH4 and BH5 as shown in Appendix 7.3) showed that only fill material was present while marine deposit was not present at the proposed excavation depth for this Zone, i.e -6.5mPD.
In addition, based on the project for West Kowloon Reclamation Southern Area Roads Roads D10, D12 and D13 in 1994, the relevant drillhole records (drillhole nos. 62 - 68 as shown in Appendix 7.3) showed that only fill material was present while marine deposit was not present at the proposed excavation depth to this Zone, i.e. -6.5mPD. From the above quoted results, it is considered that marine deposit would not be excavated at Zone 2b.
Zone
3
The site in this Zone was reclaimed in 1990s. Ground investigation works were carried out at Zone 3 under the project for West Kowloon Reclamation Southern Area Roads D10, D12 and D13 in 1994. The relevant drillhole records (drillhole nos. 73, 73A, 74 and 75 as shown in Appendix 7.4) showed that only fill material was present while marine deposit was not present at the proposed excavation depth for this Zone, i.e -1.1mPD. From the above quoted results, it is considered that marine deposit would not be excavated at Zone 3.
C&D Materials from Site Clearance Works
During the general site clearance in
preparation for the subsequent construction works, it is estimated that the top
0.3m soil layer of the entire site excluding the XRL works area temporarily
occupying the site (with a net area of around 40 – 3.9 = 36.1 ha) would be
removed, and hence approximately 108,300m3 of C&D materials
would be generated. The XRL works area
is excluded from the estimation because it is reasonable to assume that the XRL
works area will have been cleared when it is returned to the Project
Proponent. This
C&D materials would mainly be a mixture of topsoil and
vegetative material, and is considered as not suitable for direct reuse by any
earthworks on site due to its non-inert contents. However, the inert materials should be segregated from the C&D materials
on site for reuse as far as practicable, subject to constraints of the site
area. The segregated inert materials
that cannot be reused on site will
be disposed of at the Government’s PFRFs for beneficial use by other projects
in
Chemical Waste
Chemical wastes arising during the construction phase may pose environmental, health and safety hazards if not stored and disposed of in an appropriate manner as stipulated in the Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulations. The potential hazards include:
¡ Toxic effects to workers;
¡ Adverse impacts on water quality from spills and associated adverse impacts on marine biota; and
¡ Fire hazards.
The maintenance and servicing of construction plant and equipment may generate some chemical wastes such as used solvents, contaminated rags and waste lubricating oil. It is difficult to quantify the amount of chemical waste that will arise from the construction activities since it will be dependent on the Contractor’s on-site maintenance requirements and the amount of plant utilised. However, it is anticipated that the quantity of chemical waste, such as waste lubricating oil and solvents produced from plant maintenance, will be small and in the order of a few cubic metres per month. The amount of chemical waste to be generated will be quantified in the Waste Management Plan to be prepared by the Contractor for the site.
Materials
classified as chemical wastes will
require special handling and storage arrangements before removal for off-site
disposal at the approved Chemical Waste Treatment Facility or recycling by
licensed facilities. Mitigation and control requirements for chemical wastes
are detailed in Section 14.7.4.1. Provided that the handling, storage and
disposal of chemical wastes are in accordance with these requirements, adverse
environmental impacts are not expected.
General Refuse
The construction workforce will generate refuse comprising
food scraps, waste paper and
empty containers etc. Such refuse will
be properly managed so that intentional or accidental release to the
surrounding environment will be avoided. Disposal of refuse at sites other than
approved waste transfer or disposal facilities will be prohibited.
Effective collection of site wastes will be required to prevent waste
materials being blown around by wind, flushed or leached into the marine
environment, or creating an odour nuisance or pest/vermin problem. Waste
storage areas will be well
maintained and cleaned regularly. The
daily arising of general refuse from the construction workforce can be estimated based on a generation rate of 0.65 kg
per worker per day.
The maximum number of construction workers to be employed for each year from 2013 to 2017 is stated in Table 14.7.5. Based on a generation rate of 0.65 kg per worker per day, the maximum daily arising of general refuse during the construction period would be approximately 975 kg and this waste can be effectively controlled by normal measures.
Table 14.7.5: Estimation of Maximum Number of Construction Workers during Construction Phase
Construction
Year |
Maximum Number of Construction Workers |
Maximum Daily Arising of General Refuse (kg/day) |
2013 |
600 |
390 |
2014 |
1000 |
650 |
2015 |
1100 |
715 |
2016 |
1500 |
975 |
2017 |
1500 |
975 |
With the implementation of good waste management practices
at the site as detailed in Section 14.7.4.1, adverse
environmental impacts are not expected to arise from the storage, handling and
transportation of the general refuse from construction workforce.
14.7.3.2 Summary
Table 14.7.6 presents a summary of all key types of waste arising during the
construction phase of the Project.
Table 14.7.6 Summary of Waste Arisings during Construction Phase
Waste Type |
Key Sources of Waste Generation |
Timing of Waste Generation |
Estimated Quantity of Waste Generation |
Waste Reuse or Disposal |
Waste Handling |
Inert C&D Materials |
Majority from excavation work for the WKCD basement
(including the underpass road and the flyover); and minority from construction of superstructures and substructures (Note: Excavation of marine sediments is not anticipated) |
Tentatively
from 2013 to 2017 |
About 1,882,830
m3 in total |
About
146,740 m3 to be
reused on-site as fill materials for
the Park About 905,000 m3 to be reused by two potential projects, viz., HZMB project and 3rd runway project. Remaining quantity of about 831,090 m3 to
be disposed of at the Government’s
PFRFs for beneficial use by other projects in (Note: During the
detailed design stage, further
alternative disposal arrangement, e.g., other potential projects that could
receive Inert C&D materials from the WKCD Project, shall be continuously
explored and identified. If no potential projects could receive the surplus
inert C&D materials, the remaining inert C&D materials could be
disposed of at the Government's Public Fill Reception Facilities (PFRFs) for
beneficial use by any other projects in |
Segregate inert C&D materials to avoid contamination from other waste arising |
C&D Materials
from Site Clearance |
General site clearance |
Tentatively
from 2013 to 2017 |
About
108,300 m3 in total |
Any inert materials segregated from the C&D materials
to be reused on-site as far as practicable or disposed of at the Government’s
PFRFs for beneficial use by other
projects in Non-inert materials segregated from the C&D materials to be disposed of at the designated landfill sites |
Segregate on site the C&D materials into inert and non-inert materials |
General Refuse |
Waste paper, discarded containers, etc. generated from the site workforce |
Tentatively from 2013 to 2017 |
0.65 kg per worker per day, the maximum daily arising of general refuse during the construction period would be approximately 975 kg
|
Refuse station for compaction and containerisation
and then to landfill for disposal |
Provide on-site refuse collection points |
Chemical Waste |
Used solvents, contaminated rags, waste lubricating oil, etc., from maintenance and servicing of construction plant and equipment |
Tentatively from 2013 to 2017 |
Few cubic metres per month (preliminary estimate) |
Disposal of at the Chemical Waste Treatment Centre or other licensed recycling facilities |
Stored on-site by suitably designed containers for off-site disposal or recycling |
During operation phase, this underpass road project will not involve any waste generating activities. Therefore, no adverse waste management impact is anticipated during operation phase.
14.7.4 Mitigation of Adverse Environmental Impact
Good Site Practices
Adverse impacts related to waste management such as dust, odour, noise and wastewater discharge will not be expected to arise, provided that good site practices will be strictly followed. Recommendations for good site practices during the construction activities include:
¡ Nomination of an approved person, such as a site manager, to be responsible for good site practices, arrangements for collection and effective disposal to an appropriate facility, of all wastes generated at the site
¡ Training of site personnel in proper waste management and chemical handling procedures
¡ Provision of sufficient waste disposal points and regular collection of waste
¡ Appropriate measures to minimise windblown litter and dust/odour during transportation of waste by either covering trucks or by transporting wastes in enclosed containers
¡ Provision of wheel washing facilities before the trucks leaving the works area so as to minimise dust introduction to public roads
¡ Well planned delivery programme for offsite disposal such that adverse environmental impact from transporting the inert or non-inert C&D materials is not anticipated
Waste Reduction Measures
Good management and control can prevent the generation of a significant amount of waste. Waste reduction is best achieved at the planning and design stage, as well as by ensuring the implementation of good site practices. Recommendations to achieve waste reduction include:
¡ Sort inert C&D materials to recover any recyclable portions such as metals
¡ Segregation and storage of different types of waste in different containers or skips to enhance reuse or recycling of materials and their proper disposal
¡ Encourage collection of recyclable waste such as waste paper and aluminium cans by providing separate labelled bins to enable such waste to be segregated from other general refuse generated by the work force
¡ Proper site practices to minimise the potential for damage or contamination of inert C&D materials
¡ Plan the use of construction materials carefully to minimise amount of waste generated and avoid unnecessary generation of waste
In addition to the above measures, specific mitigation measures are recommended below for the identified waste arising to minimise environmental impacts during handling, transportation and disposal of these wastes.
Inert and
Non-inert C&D Materials
In
order to minimise impacts resulting from collection and transportation of inert
C&D materials for off-site disposal, the excavated materials should be
reused on-site as fill material
as far as practicable. In addition, inert C&D materials generated from
excavation works could be reused as fill materials in
local projects that require
public fill for reclamation.
The
surplus inert C&D materials will
be disposed of at the Government’s PFRFs for beneficial use by other projects
in
Liaison with the
CEDD Public Fill Committee (PFC) on the allocation of space for disposal of the
inert C&D materials at PFRF is underway.
No construction work is allowed to proceed until all issues on
management of inert C&D materials have been resolved and all relevant
arrangements have been endorsed by the relevant authorities including PFC and
EPD.
The C&D materials
generated from general site
clearance should be sorted on site to segregate any inert materials for reuse
or disposal of at PFRFs whereas the non-inert materials will be disposed of at the designated
landfill site.
In order to monitor the disposal of inert and non-inert C&D materials at respectively PFRFs and the designated landfill site, and to control fly-tipping, it is recommended that the Contractor should follow the Technical Circular (Works) No.6/2010 for Trip Ticket System for Disposal of Construction & Demolition Materials issued by Development Bureau. In addition, it is also recommended that the Contractor should prepare and implement a Waste Management Plan detailing their various waste arising and waste management practices in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Technical Circular (Works) No. 19/2005 Environmental Management on Construction Site.
Chemical Waste
If chemical wastes are produced at the construction site, the Contractor will be required to register with the EPD as a chemical waste producer and to follow the guidelines stated in the “Code of Practice on the Packaging Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes”. Good quality containers compatible with the chemical wastes should be used, and incompatible chemicals should be stored separately. Appropriate labels should be securely attached on each chemical waste container indicating the corresponding chemical characteristics of the chemical waste, such as explosive, flammable, oxidizing, irritant, toxic, harmful, corrosive, etc. The Contractor should use a licensed collector to transport and dispose of the chemical wastes at the approved Chemical Waste Treatment Centre or other licensed recycling facilities, in accordance with the Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation.
Potential environmental impacts arising from the handling activities (including storage, collection,
transportation and disposal of chemical waste) are expected to be minimal with the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures as
recommended.
General Refuse
General refuse should be stored in enclosed bins or compaction units separated from inert C&D materials. A reputable waste collector should be employed by the Contractor to remove general refuse from the site, separately from inert C&D materials. Preferably an enclosed and covered area should be provided to reduce the occurrence of 'wind blown' light material.
14.7.4.2 Operation Phase
During operation phase, this underpass road project will not involve any waste generating activities. Therefore, no adverse waste management impact is anticipated during operation phase, and no mitigation measures are required.
14.7.5 Evaluation of Residual Impact
With the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures for the handling, transportation and disposal of the identified waste arising, residual impacts are not expected for both construction and operation phases.
14.7.6 Environmental Monitoring and Audit
It will be the Contractor’s responsibilities to ensure that all wastes produced during the construction of the Project are handled, stored and disposed of in accordance with good waste management practices and the relevant regulations and requirements. The recommended mitigation measures shall form the basis of the Waste Management Plan to be developed by the Contractor in the construction phase.
During construction phase, regular site inspection
as part of the EM&A procedures should be carried
out to determine if various types of waste are being managed in accordance with
approved procedures and the Waste Management Plan. It should cover different
aspects of waste management including waste generation, storage, recycling,
treatment, transport and disposal.
14.7.7 Conclusion
14.7.7.1
Construction Phase
The major waste types generated by the construction activities will include inert C&D materials from excavation works for the basement (including the underpass road and the flyover) as well as from construction of superstructures and substructures; C&D materials from general site clearance; chemical waste from maintenance and servicing of construction plant and equipment; and general refuse from the workforce. Provided that all these identified wastes are handled, transported and disposed of in strict accordance with the relevant legislative and recommended requirements and that the recommended good site practices and mitigation measures are properly implemented, no adverse environmental impact is expected during the construction phase.
14.7.7.2 Operation Phase
During operation phase, this underpass road project will not involve any waste generating activities. Therefore, no adverse waste management impact is anticipated during operation phase, and no mitigation measures are required.
The potential environmental issues associated with land contamination at the location of the proposed underpass road have been reviewed and are presented in this section. The review is comprised of desktop studies of previous EIAs and land contamination assessments undertaken in the area by other projects as well as earlier assessments undertaken by the Conceptual Plan Consultants for the WKCD development. Potential impacts from contaminated sites during construction phase and the need for mitigation measures have been qualitatively assessed in accordance with the clause 3.4.9 of the EIA Study Brief (ESB-237/2011).
In accordance with the requirement set out in Appendix E2 of the EIA Study Brief, a Contamination Assessment Plan (CAP) has been prepared for the WKCD development and was submitted in January 2012. The CAP is attached in Appendix 8.1.
14.8.1 Environmental Legislations, Standards and Guidelines
The relevant standards and guidelines on land contamination assessment and remediation include the following:
¡ Section 3 of Annex 19 to the
EIAO-TM;
¡ Guidance Note for Contaminated
Land Assessment and Remediation (August 2007);
¡ Guidance Manual for Use of
Risk-Based Remediation Goals for Contaminated Land Management (RBRGs Guidance
Manual) (December 2007); and
¡ Practice Guide for Investigation
and Remediation of Contaminated Land (August 2011).
The uses that may have the potential to cause land contamination include among others:
¡ Oil installations including oil
depots and petrol filling stations;
¡ Gas works;
¡ Power plants;
¡ Shipyards/boatyards;
¡ Chemical
manufacturing/processing plants;
¡ Steel mills/metal workshops;
¡ Car repairing and dismantling
workshops; and
¡ Scrap yards.
14.8.2 Description of the Environmental Baseline Conditions
The
proposed underpass road is located on the West Kowloon Reclamation south of
The site reserved for the WKCD basement structure with associated underpass road is currently occupied by works sites, local roads, temporary storage / parking facilities, some existing infrastructure and utility facilities, the existing Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station and the works site and temporary works areas for the Hong Kong Section of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL) project.
14.8.3 Assessment Methodology
In order to identify the presence of any potentially contaminative land within or in the proximity of the Project area, the following tasks have been undertaken:
¡ Desktop study to review the current and historical land uses;
¡ Acquisition of information related to potential land contamination from Environmental Compliance Division of Environmental Protection Department (EPD) and Fire Services Department (FSD); and
¡ Site surveys to identify the existing land uses.
Relevant information were collected and reviewed as part of the desktop study, including:
¡ Historical aerial photographs of
the Project area;
¡ Records of active (current) and
inactive (past) registered chemical waste producers in the areas of interest
from EPD;
¡ Records of current and past
dangerous good (DG) licences in the areas of interest from FSD;
¡ Records of accidents that
involved spillage/leakage of chemical waste or DG from EPD and FSD; and
¡ Previously approved studies,
including previously approved EIA Reports
Site surveys were undertaken to identify current land uses in the Project area and verify the findings of the desktop study.
14.8.3.1 Desktop Study
Review of Historical Aerial Photographs
Relevant historical aerial photographs taken between 1963 and 2004 and covering the Project area, where available, were collected and reviewed. The historical land uses identified from the review are summarised in Table 14.8.1 below for evaluation of potential land contamination.
Table 14.8.1: Land
Use History of Project Area
Date |
Ref. no. |
Height (ft) |
Land Use |
25/01/1963 |
5186 |
2,700 |
open sea, bare ground, low rise buildings |
29/01/1976 |
13085 |
4,000 |
open sea, bare ground, low rise buildings |
27/09/1995 |
CN11223 |
3,500 |
reclaimed land, construction site, low rise buildings |
28/09/2004 |
CW59616 |
4,000 |
reclaimed land, bare ground, ventilation buildings, low rise buildings |
25/07/2008 |
CS13725 |
6,000 |
reclaimed land, bare ground, ventilation buildings, parking facilities, construction site, low rise buildings |
* Please refer to Appendix A of the CAP prepared for WKCD (see Appendix 8.1) for the selected aerial photos
Review of Previously Approved Studies/Reports
The relevant study area for this project as mentioned in the Contamination Assessment Plan (CAP) and the Contamination Assessment Report and Remediation Action Plan (CAR/RAP) of the approved Kowloon Southern Link (KSL) EIA Report (Ref. No. EIA-098/2004) were reviewed. As stated in Section 3.5.2 of the KSL CAP, there are two underground fuel oil storage tanks at Tsim Sha Tsui (TST) Fire Station, one for storage of diesel and the other for petrol. The volume of each tank is approximately 4.6m3 and have been used for more than 30 years, with no record of previous spillage/leakage at the time. Information extracted from the approved CAP and CAR/RAP of KSL is provided in Appendix B of the CAP prepared for WKCD (see Appendix 8.1) for reference.
The CAP for KSL proposed five sampling locations, two of which are located in the immediate vicinity of the TST Fire Station (drillholes ref. KSD100/DHEPZ052 and KSD100/DHE056). As documented in Section 5 of the approved CAR/RAP for KSL, laboratory test results for samples taken from those two drillholes (as shown in Appendix B of the CAP prepared for WKCD – see Appendix 8.1) indicated no contamination with reference to the Dutch B levels (the standards adopted at the time of preparing the KSL EIA). However, given that the Risk Based Remediation Goals (RBRG) has been introduced by EPD for land contamination assessment since August 2007 to replace Dutch B levels, the previous site investigation results from the KSL study were checked against the RBRG criteria in order to confirm compliance under the new assessment criteria.
Based on the RBRG land use classification under the Guidance Manual, the Project site (which includes the WKCD development with planned residential developments) should be classified under the more stringent “Urban Residential” land use category. Table 14.8.2 shows the corresponding RBRG standards against the results from KSL.
Table 14.8.2: Comparison of KSL site investigation results against RBRG criteria
Chemical Parameters (tested in KSL CAR/RAP) |
Units |
RBRG Limit Level for ‘Urban Residential’ |
Maximum Concentration Detected in Drillhole KSD100/DHEPZ052 |
Maximum Concentration Detected in Drillhole KSD100/DHE056 |
Metals |
|
|
|
|
Cadmium |
mg/kg |
73.8 |
0.5 |
0.02 |
Chromium |
mg/kg |
221 |
13 |
0.9 |
Copper |
mg/kg |
2950 |
6.4 |
1.4 |
Nickel |
mg/kg |
1480 |
4 |
0.7 |
Lead |
mg/kg |
258 |
93 |
140 |
Zinc |
mg/kg |
10000 |
170 |
18 |
Mercury |
mg/kg |
11 |
0.5 |
0.2 |
Arsenic |
mg/kg |
22.1 |
4.3 |
1.5 |
Barium |
mg/kg |
10000 |
75 |
41 |
Cobalt |
mg/kg |
1480 |
4.1 |
5.5 |
Molybdenum |
mg/kg |
369 |
9.5 |
4.9 |
Tin |
mg/kg |
10000 |
<5 |
<5 |
TPH |
|
|
|
|
C6 – C9 |
mg/kg |
1410(C6-8), 2240(C9) |
<2 |
<2 |
C10 –C14 |
mg/kg |
2240 |
<50 |
<50 |
C15 – C28 |
mg/kg |
2240(C15-16), 10000(C17-28) |
<100 |
246 |
C29 – C36 |
mg/kg |
10000 |
<100 |
167 |
BTEX |
|
|
|
|
Benzene |
mg/kg |
0.704 |
<0.2 |
<0.2 |
Ethylbenzene |
mg/kg |
709 |
<0.2 |
<0.2 |
Toluene |
mg/kg |
1440 |
<0.2 |
<0.2 |
Meta - & |
mg/kg |
95 |
<0.4 |
<0.4 |
Ortho Xylene |
mg/kg |
<0.2 |
<0.2 |
|
Others |
|
|
|
|
Cyanide |
mg/kg |
1480 |
<1 |
<1 |
Sulphate (acid soluble) |
mg/kg |
- |
0.96 |
0.04 |
Source: KSL EIA Report, Appendix 10-2 – Contamination Assessment Report and Remediation Action Plan
As shown in Table 14.8.2, the results from the CAR/RAP for KSL are all well within the RBRG limit levels, which reaffirms the findings of the CAR/RAP for KSL.
Aside
from the TST Fire Station, the ex-government dockyard was also identified in
the KSL study as a potentially contaminated site, however, it is located
entirely outside the Project boundary, and as mentioned in the CAR/RAP for KSL,
the contamination at the ex-government dockyard was found to be localized and was planned to
be remediated under KSL project. Based on the aforementioned
information, no historical land contamination is anticipated within the Project
area that has been covered by the KSL EIA.
Relevant information from the West Kowloon Cut and Cover Section (WKCC) of the Express Rail Link (XRL) project including CAP and CAR of the approved XRL EIA Report were also reviewed. The study area of the WKCC partly falls within the Project area. Site appraisal conducted for XRL has concluded that within the Project boundary, there were no adverse land contamination impacts identified. In the CAP for WKCC, sampling and testing plan was only recommended for the area of City Golf Club which is located entirely outside the Project boundary and therefore has no implication on the Project.
Review of Records from Government
Departments
Relevant data, including records of active and inactive registered chemical waste producers, records of current and past dangerous goods (DG) licences, and records of any accident that involved spillage/leakage of chemical waste or DG within or in the immediate vicinity of the Project area were collected from EPD and FSD. Records of registered chemical waste producers collected from EPD are presented in Appendix C of the CAP prepared for WKCD (see Appendix 8.1). Replies from the two Government departments in response to the information requests are presented in Appendix D of the CAP prepared for WKCD (see Appendix 8.1) for reference.
A review of the records from EPD revealed that while there are a number of registered chemical waste producers in the area surrounding the Project, the Project area will not encroach onto these existing facilities. There was also no record of any accident that involved spillage/leakage of chemical waste within or in the proximity of the Project area.
Reply from FSD revealed that the only licensed DG stores in the proximity of Project area are the two underground fuel oil storage tanks (each with a capacity of 4,600 litres) located at the TST Fire Station, but no incident records of spillage/leakage of DG were identified.
14.8.3.2 Site Surveys
Site surveys were carried out from July to December 2011 to identify current land uses along the Project area and to verify the findings of the desktop appraisal (see Appendix 8.1 for the CAP prepared for WKCD). The following land uses along the Project area were identified:
¡ Local roads;
¡ Temporary storage/parking facilities;
¡ Some existing infrastructure and utility facilities;
¡ Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station; and
¡ Works site and temporary works areas for the Hong Kong Section of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL) project.
14.8.4 Identification and Evaluation of Environmental Impact
14.8.4.1 Construction Phase
Based on the findings from the desktop study, the current land uses, including potentially contaminative uses within or in the vicinity of the Project area, have been identified as summarized in Table 14.8.3.
Table 14.8.3: Potential
Contamination for the
Project
Area
and its vicinity
Areas |
|
Historical Land Use |
|
Need for Further Site Investigation |
Tsim Sha Tsui (TST) Fire Station |
Fire station |
Fire station |
|
Yes |
Other land uses in West Kowloon Reclamation Area |
Temporary works area, parking area, open area, ventilation buildings, waterfront promenade |
Reclaimed
land, open sea; (near eastern boundary) open area |
No contaminative land uses were identified |
No |
Although there were no records of any accidents involving spillage/leakage of chemical waste or DG within or in the proximity of the Project area, it is proposed to carry out further site investigation for the TST Fire Station location to identify any potential sources of land contamination that may be due to, but not limited to, leakage or spillage from the fuel oil tanks, pipes, or during refilling. The reason is as follows.
Based on the latest WKCD
implementation programme, it is aimed to commence construction works for the
critical elements of WKCD (including part of the underpass road) in as early as
2013 so as to commission the Phase 1 arts and cultural facilities in stages
from 2014/2015 to 2020. While the existing TST Fire Station is scheduled to be
relocated in phases, it will unlikely be relocated before 2020. During the
period between now and 2020, the TST Fire Station will remain in operation, and
leakage or spillage from the underground fuel oil tanks or pipes,
or during refilling might occur. As such, further site visit and site
investigation/laboratory chemical analysis are suggested to be conducted after
land acquisition, so that the investigation results will be up to date. For
this, the CAP prepared for WKCD has
included the proposed site investigation work for the TST Fire Station area (see
Appendix
8.1).
The
site investigation should be assessed by a competent land contamination
specialist, and the specialist should
carry out the assessment to determine whether the location of the TST Fire
Station is contaminated and to assess the extent of any contamination
identified. Should any area be identified/suspected of being contaminated, soil
and groundwater samples should be collected for analysis, and the sampling
points should be located at or near potential sources of contamination, e.g.
near the underground storage tanks or pipes. The recommended testing as
described in Section 4 of the CAP (see Appendix 8.1) should be undertaken or
referenced to identify any contamination.
The updated CAP should include proposals on
the sampling and analysis and should be submitted to EPD for approval prior to
the demolition work. Upon approval of the CAP, the Project Proponent should
conduct a land contamination assessment and the findings should be presented in
a CAR. If land contamination is confirmed with reference to the relevant RBRG
levels, the Project Proponent should prepare a RAP in which further hotspots of
contaminated soil that require soil remediation should be identified. Section 4
of the current CAP (see Appendix 8.1) has provided an outline of the
proposed site investigation plan to be conducted after land acquisition at the
TST Fire Station.
Other than the TST Fire Station area, the
land contamination potential of the Project area is considered as low because the
area is a short-history reclaimed land
and has been used as open area/
temporary works area without any indication of industrial activities. Recent site inspection has identified no major change in land use and
confirmed the validity of previous land contamination assessment. No major land
contaminative uses were identified in the area.
14.8.4.2
Operation
Phase
During
operation phase, the underpass road will be used as an access for vehicles
moving to and from the WKCD site and its associated facilities. There will be no industrial
activities taking place at the Project
area during operation phase. Therefore,
no contaminated land issue is anticipated.
14.8.5 Mitigation of Adverse Environmental Impact
The potential for land contamination issues at the TST Fire Station due to its future relocation will be confirmed by site investigation after land acquisition. Where necessary, mitigation measures for minimising potential exposure to contaminated materials (if any) or remediation measures will be identified. If contaminated land is identified (e.g., during decommissioning of fuel oil storage tanks) after the commencement of works, mitigation measures are proposed in order to minimize the potentially adverse effects on the health and safety of construction workers and impacts arising from the disposal of potentially contaminated materials.
The following measures are proposed for excavation and transportation of contaminated material:
¡ To minimize the chance for construction workers to come into contact with any contaminated materials, bulk earth-moving excavation equipment should be employed;
¡ Contact with contaminated materials can be minimised by wearing appropriate clothing and personal protective equipment such as gloves and masks (especially when interacting directly with contaminated material), provision of washing facilities and prohibition of smoking and eating on site;
¡ Stockpiling of contaminated excavated materials on site should be avoided as far as possible;
¡ The use of contaminated soil for landscaping purpose should be avoided unless pre-treatment was carried out;
¡ Vehicles containing any contaminated excavated materials should be suitably covered to reduce dust emissions and/or release of contaminated wastewater;
¡ Truck bodies and tailgates should be sealed to stop any discharge;
¡ Only licensed waste haulers should be used to collect and transport contaminated material to treatment/disposal site and should be equipped with tracking system to avoid fly tipping;
¡ Speed control for trucks carrying contaminated materials should be exercised;
¡ Observe all relevant regulations in relation to waste handling, such as Waste Disposal Ordinance (Cap 354), Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation (Cap 354) and obtain all necessary permits where required; and
¡ Maintain records of waste generation and disposal quantities and disposal arrangements.
14.8.6 Evaluation of Residual Impact
Based on the desktop review and available site investigation results for land contamination assessment of the Project, no major contaminated land issue has been revealed, although site investigation is suggested for the TST Fire Station area after its land acquisition. Hence, no land remediation action is proposed at this stage, and no residual impact in relation to land remediation is anticipated.
14.8.7 Environmental Monitoring and Audit
As explained above, land remediation is not expected at this stage. Therefore, environmental monitoring in relation to land remediation is not required, unless a need for land remediation is identified during the future site investigation for the TST Fire Station area.
However, during construction phase, environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) is to be carried out in the form of regular site inspection. All related procedures and facilities for handling or storage of chemicals and chemical wastes will be audited regularly to make sure they are in order and intact and reported in the EM&A reports as such.
14.8.8 Conclusion
The land contamination assessment has been conducted by reviewing historical/current land uses, desktop review and site surveys with respect to the potential land contamination at the Project area. Other relevant information was also collected from the related Government Departments.
Based on the findings of the site surveys on the existing and historical land uses in the Project area and review of relevant records and reports, adverse land contamination impacts associated with the construction and operation of the Project is not anticipated except for demolition of the two underground fuel oil storage tanks and associated pipes at the existing TST Fire Station within the WKCD site. As the existing TST Fire Station will remain in operation until its relocation in phases, which will unlikely be started before 2020, it is proposed to carry out further site investigation after obtaining access to the Fire Station in order to obtain up-to–date site investigation findings for assessment of land contamination that may occur between now and its future relocation. The site investigation findings should be documented in a CAR and where necessary a RAP should also be prepared for submission to EPD for approval.
Mitigation measures for handling of contaminated materials, in case it is discovered after commencement of the works, and regular site audits are recommended to minimize the potential adverse impacts on workers’ health and safety and disposal of any potentially contaminated materials.
The ecological impact assessment has been conducted in accordance with the requirements of Annexes 8 and 16 of the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM) and the requirements stated in Section 3.2.1 (viii), Section 3.4.10 and Appendix F of the EIA Study Brief (No. ESB-237/2011). This section presents the potential ecological impacts that may arise due to construction and operation of the underpass road for the WKCD development.
14.9.1 Ecological Legislations, Standards and Guidelines
A number of
international conventions, local legislation and guidelines provide the
framework for protection of species and habitats of ecological importance.
Those of relevance include:
¡ Forests and Countryside Ordinance (Cap. 96), which protects the rare plant
species from selling, offering for sale, or possession illegally;
¡ Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170), which protects wild animals
listed under the second schedule from being hunted, possession, sale or export,
disturbance of their nest or egg without permission by authorized officer;
¡ Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap. 586), which regulates the
import, introduction from the sea, export, re-export, and possession of
specimens of a scheduled species, including the live, dead, parts or
derivatives. The Ordinance applies to all activities involving endangered
species which include the parties of traders, tourists and individuals;
¡ Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) (Cap. 499), which specifies
designated projects under the Ordinance, unless exempted, must follow the
statutory environmental impact assessment (EIA) process;
¡ Annexes 8 and 16 of the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact
Assessment Process (EIAO-TM): Annex 8 recommends the criteria for evaluating ecological
impacts. Annex 16 sets out the general approach and methodology for assessment
of ecological impacts arising from a project or proposal, to allow a complete
and objective identification, prediction and evaluation of the potential
ecological impacts;
¡ EIAO Guidance Note No. 7/2010 “Ecological Baseline Survey for Ecological
Assessment”, provides the general guidelines for conducting an ecological
baseline survey to fulfil the requirements stipulated in the EIAO-TM in respect
of ecological assessment for a proposed development;
¡ EIAO Guidance Note No. 10/2010 ”Methodologies for Terrestrial and Freshwater
Ecological Baseline Surveys”, provides some methodologies in conducting
terrestrial and freshwater ecological baseline surveys. This guidance note
should be read in conjunction with EIAO Guidance Note 7/2010;
¡ Town Planning Ordinance (Cap. 131), which gives designation to country parks, conservation
area, green belts, sites of special scientific interest, coastal protection
area and other specified uses to promote conservation , protection and
education of the valuable environment; and
¡ Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines Chapter 10 (HKPSG) provides the
guidelines on landscape and conservation to achieve a balance between the need
for development and the need to minimise disruption of the landscape and
natural resources.
14.9.2 Assessment Methodology
14.9.2.1
Study
Area
The Study Area for impact assessment of
terrestrial ecology covers all the areas within 500m from the underpass road site
boundary and the areas likely to be affected by the underpass road. The study
was firstly conducted by literature review and supplemented by on site
ecological baseline surveys where it is found necessary.
14.9.2.2
Literature Review
The ecological baseline condition of the
Study Area was collected through a combination of both literature review and
updated field survey. Preliminary desktop study and literature review were
conducted to investigate the existing condition within the Study Area and
identify habitats or species with conservation concern. Available sources of
information relevant to this Project including Government and private sector
reports, published literature and academic studies were covered in the
literature review.
14.9.2.3
Ecological Baseline Surveys
Since previous literature for this urban
area is very limited, ecological baseline survey was conducted to supplement
the literature review finding. The ecological baseline condition was updated through
ecological field surveys, which were conducted in accordance with the
requirements stated in the EIA Study Brief (No. ESB-237/2011) and guidelines
stated in EIAO Guidance Note No. 7/2010 “Ecological
Baseline Survey for Ecological Assessment” and EIAO Guidance Note No.
10/2010 ”Methodologies for Terrestrial
and Freshwater Ecological Baseline Surveys“.
Habitat and vegetation
surveys were conducted for 4
months (during July to December 2011) covering both wet and dry seasons within the ecological Study Area. Special
attention was paid on species of conservation concern and habitats within the
proposed works area where the vegetation will be directly impacted.
Habitat map of
suitable scale showing the type and location of habitats recorded within the Study
Area, with the overlay plot of the Project boundary was produced, as shown in Figure 14.9.1.
Fauna surveys were conducted within the Study Area for 4 months (during July to December 2011) covering both wet
and dry seasons. Since the
Project Area are newly created through reclamation and enclosed by developed
area, the colonization of flora and fauna species are of low ecological
importance. Only the highly mobile bird species would have better chance of colonization
of the newly created habitat and also use the habitat for stopover ground
during migration; so, the baseline survey is mainly focused on avifauna.
Transect count surveys were adopted with the aid
by a pair of binoculars to assist the identification of species.
The transect route is indicated in Figure 14.9.2.
14.9.3 Baseline Conditions
14.9.3.1
Terrestrial
Habitat and Vegetation
The Project Area is located at the
There are 4 types of terrestrial habitat identified in the Study Area, namely:
¡ Plantation;
¡ Open Field;
¡ Artificial Seawall; and
¡ Developed Area.
A habitat map showing the location of each
type of habitat is presented in Figure 14.9.1. Representative photographs of each type of habitats are illustrated
in Appendix
9.1. Brief
descriptions of these habitat types and the dominant floral species assemble of
the habitat are described as follows:
¡ Plantation refers to landscape
plantation. This man-made habitat comprises short shrubs and ornamental trees. This
habitat is scattered at a few locations within the Project Area for the
underpass road, mainly at the site boundary near the Western Harbour Crossing. Dominant
tree species identified in these locations are common native species such as Acacia auriculiformis, Ficus microcarpa and Hibiscus tiliaceus, and exotic species Leucaena leucocephala.
Open Field
¡ Open field refers to bare ground
or wasteland. This type of habitat is mainly identified close to West Kowloon
Waterfront Promenade. It is sparsely vegetated with a few common self-seeded
species, e.g. Rhynchelytrum repens,
Imperata koenigii and Bidens alba.
Artificial
Seawall
¡ The artificial seawall refers to
the sloping waterfront formed by large boulders for protection of shoreline and
typhoon shelter. It happens in the southwest of the WKCD site boundary and the
breakwaters in the New Yau Ma Tei Typhoon Shelter. Owing to the short history
of the artificial habitat, the intertidal habitat are mainly colonized by
pioneer species which are common and widespread in Hong Kong coastal area.
Developed Area
¡ Developed areas are artificial
habitats. This man-made habitat comprises the existing buildings, sitting-out
area, work site, paths and roads within the Project Area for the underpass road.
This urbanised land use is of negligible ecological importance.
¡ To the northwest of the Project
Area for the underpass road is a New Yau Ma Tei Typhoon Shelter, which is
enclosed by artificial breakwater structure. It is generally of low ecological
value due to high level of marine traffic but sometimes used by ardeid species
for foraging.
Within the Project Area for the underpass
road, both open field and plantation habitats are of limited ecological value
owing to the high level of anthropogenic disturbance, low vegetation cover,
high commonness of the flora and fauna species and short history of the
vegetated habitat. The fauna species associated with these two habitats are
mostly common species adapted to urbanized areas. The bird species found in the
site is dominated by generalist species such as Tree Sparrow, Chinese Bulbul
and Black-collared Starling, which are common in urban areas.
The
14.9.3.2
Terrestrial
Fauna
The fauna species inhabiting the Project Area
for the underpass road are mostly generalist species adapted to urban area,
with some migratory bird species which sometimes use the fragmented vegetated habitat
in urban area as temporary stopover point during their migratory journey. It is
noted that open field and plantation in urban area are generally not the prime
habitats for wild birds. Field surveys were conducted during July to December
2011 to verify the ecological status of the habitats.
Field surveys for avifauna were conducted on
18 July, 26 September, 30 November and 28 December 2011 covering
both summer and winter periods, which also include bird’s breeding and
wintering season. The checklist of avifauna recorded within the Project Area
for the underpass road is presented in Appendix 9.2. It was observed that the open
field and plantation habitats within the Project Area were inhabited by a
number of generalist species, such as Black-collared Starling, Eurasian Tree
Sparrow, Spotted Dove, Chinese Bulbul, Red-whiskered Bulbul and Crested Myna. All
of them are very common in urban area. Long-tailed Shrike and Plain Prinia are
less common in urban area; both were seen in the open field area. A few
migratory species including Brown Shrike, Blackbird, Blue Rock Thrush and
Yellow-browed Warbler were seen during the surveys conducted in September to
December 2011, in the period of migratory season. The low number of migratory
species recorded indicates that the habitats within the Study Area are not the
prime habitat for migratory birds, probably due to lack of mature vegetation
and proximity to high rise buildings. With regard to raptor species, only Black
Kite, which is of conservation concern, was recorded during the survey. The
wintering population of Black Kite forage along
The southern part of the New Yau Ma Tei
Typhoon Shelter lies within the 500m Study Area. Typhoon shelter is generally
not an optimal habitat for avifauna but a few seashore associated species such
as ardeids and Black Kite are often found foraging in the typhoon shelter.
Also, a passage migrant species Whiskered Tern was recorded in autumn migration
period.
To the south of the project area is
14.9.3.3
Habitat
Evaluation
Habitats identified within the Ecological
Study Area are evaluated in accordance with the guidelines set forth in the
Annex 8 of the EIAO-TM. Overall ecological values for each habitat type are
ranked as follows:
¡ High
¡ High-moderate
¡ Moderate
¡ Moderate-low
¡ Low
¡ Very Low
Evaluation of these habitats is given in Table 14.9.1. Each habitat is evaluated in
accordance with the requirements stipulated in Annex 8, Table (2) of the
EIAO-TM.
Table 14.9.1: Habitat
Evaluation
Criteria |
Developed Area |
Open Field |
|
Artificial
Seawall |
Naturalness |
Man-made habitat |
Man-made habitat |
Man-made habitat |
Man-made
habitat |
Size |
Large (113.79 ha) |
Small (11.84 ha) |
Small (10.48 ha) |
Small (1.30 ha) |
Diversity |
Low in both fauna and flora species diversity |
Low in both fauna and flora species diversity;
self-seeded flora species are common and widespread |
Low in both fauna and flora species diversity |
Low
diversity of coastal fauna in new artificial habitat |
Rarity |
Habitat not rare |
Common habitat |
Common
habitat |
Common
artificial habitat |
Re-creatability |
Readily re-creatable |
Readily re-creatable |
Readily re-creatable |
Readily re-creatable |
Fragmentation |
N/A |
N/A |
These habitats are patchily created/ modified for urban land use |
N/A |
Ecological linkage |
No ecological linkage |
Low ecological linkage with other habitats |
Low ecological linkage with other habitats |
Ecological
linkage to marine habitat |
Potential value |
Low potential value |
Low potential value |
Low potential value as the habitat is being maintained for urban landscaping |
Low potential value |
Nursery/ breeding ground |
Not significant nursery/ breeding ground |
Not significant nursery/ breeding ground |
Not significant nursery/ breeding ground |
Not significant nursery/ breeding ground |
Age |
N/A |
5 – 10 years |
Mostly around 10 years |
Mostly around 10 years |
Abundance/ Richness of wildlife |
Low |
Low |
Low |
Low |
Overall Ecological Value |
Very Low |
Very low |
Low |
Low |
14.9.4 Evaluation and Assessment of Ecological Impacts
In view of the developments proposed in
Section 2, ecological impact on habitat, flora and fauna species are predicted
and evaluated in accordance with Annex 16 of the EIAO-TM and the criteria set
forth in Annex 8 of the EIAO-TM.
The potential ecological impact due to the construction
and operation of the Project include following:
¡ Habitat Loss
¡ Indirect Impact
¡ Habitat Fragmentation
¡ Operation Phase Impact
Evaluation of the impacts is given below and
a summary of the ecological impact is presented in Table 14.9.2.
14.9.4.1
Habitat
Loss
The construction and operation of the underpass
road would cause the loss of existing habitat in the West Kowloon Reclamation
area. Owing to the low ecological value of the artificial habitat, the
ecological impact due to the loss of open field and plantation is considered to
be insignificant. With regard to avifauna, since the habitats are used by very
common generalist species, the impact on avifauna due to loss of open field and
plantation is also insignificant.
14.9.4.2
Indirect
Impact
Indirect impact through construction
activities may cause local disturbance to off-site habitats. Excessive noise,
vibrations, dust generation and increased human activities may all contribute
to disturbance impact during construction and operation phases. The fauna
species occurring in urban areas can generally tolerate a high level of human
disturbance, so the impact on fauna species is considered to be minimal. Given
that the West Kowloon Reclamation and adjacent area are predominately urbanized
area with low to very low ecological value, the impact of indirect off-site
disturbance is also considered to be insignificant.
New Yau Ma Tei Typhoon
Shelter
As observed in the field survey, Black Kite
was commonly seen soaring high above the New Yau Ma Tei Typhoon Shelter.
Although it is the only raptor of conservation concern recorded, no impact on
this species is predicted as it is adapted to urbanized area along the
Also commonly recorded in the New Yau Ma Tei
Typhoon Shelter is the ardeid species, foraging at the breakwater or standing
on boats. The New Yau Ma Tei Typhoon Shelter is not particularly important to
the ardeids as this species is common along the coastline in
During the survey in September, a group of
Whiskered Tern were observed foraging over the sea around the typhoon shelter.
This species is an uncommon passage migrant in
Little Egret were
commonly found passing and sometimes foraging along the coast of
The existing buildings surrounding
14.9.4.3
Habitat Fragmentation
Given that the Project Area neighbours with
urban area and no habitat of conservation concern is identified in the Study
Area, there is no ecological linkage identified in the Study Area. As such,
there is no habitat fragmentation impact.
14.9.4.4
Potential
Impacts during Operation Phase
No ecological impacts are anticipated during
the operation of the proposed underpass road. Conversely, the underpass road
will be located below ground with a considerable amount of green area in the
form of landscape measures to be provisioned at ground level. During operation
phase, the fauna species inhabit in the area above the underpass road will
adapt to the WKCD environment, and they will locate themselves to the area with
lesser disturbance, e.g. location with lesser light intensity.
Table 14.9.2: Summary
of the potential ecological impact
Criteria |
Habitat Loss |
Indirect Impact (disturbance) |
Habitat
Fragmentation |
Operation Phase |
Duration |
Construction Phase |
Construction Phase |
Construction
and operation phase |
Operation Phase |
Reversibility |
Not Reversible |
Reversible |
Reversible |
Not Reversible |
Magnitude |
Moderate-low for loss of open field of large size but of very low ecological value |
Moderate |
Low |
Low |
Impact Severity |
Insignificant, the habitat to be lost is of low to very low ecological value |
Insignificant, the ecological value of the urbanized area is very low |
Negligible |
Insignificant
/ potentially positive |
14.9.5 Mitigation Measures
Since no significant ecological impact due to the underpass road was identified, no specific ecological mitigation measures other than good site practice is required.
14.9.6 Residual Impacts
Since no significant ecological impact will
arise from the proposed underpass road, no residual impact is expected without
specific ecological mitigation measures.
14.9.7 Environmental Monitoring and Audit
The implementation of good site practices
would avoid and minimize any ecological impacts to an acceptable level. No
specific ecological monitoring programme is thus required for the underpass
road.
14.9.8 Conclusion
The findings from the field survey and
desktop review indicated that the major terrestrial habitats in the Study Area
are developed area, open field and plantation, with small amount of sloping
seawall along the coastline. All these habitats are with low vegetation cover,
short planting history and of low to very low ecological value. Therefore,
direct ecological impact on loss of habitat is considered to be of
insignificant. The indirect disturbance impact to offsite habitat is considered
to be of insignificant in both construction and operation phases, since the proposed
underpass road is surrounded by urbanized area. The plantation and landscape
planting included in the development plan would have potential positive
contribution to the local ecology.
14.9.9 References
AECOM
(2009). Consultancy Agreement No. NOL/ERL-300 Environmental Impact Assessment
of Hong Kong Section of
AECOM (2009). Consultancy
Agreement No. NOL/ERL-300 Environmental
Impact Assessment of Road Works at
Carey,
G.J., Chalmers, M.L., Diskin, D.A., Kennerley, P.R., Leader, P.J., Leven, M.R.,
Lewthwaite, R.W., Melville, D.S., Turnbull, M., and Young, L. (2001). The Avifauna of
Carey, G.J. and
Lockey, Helen (Ed.) (2010) The Hong Kong Bird Report 2005-06. The Hong Kong
Bird Watching Society Limited,
Fellowes, J.R., Lau,
M.W.N., Dudgeon, D., Reels, G.T., Ades, G.W.J., Carey,G.J., Chan, B.P.L.,
Kendrick, R.C., Lee, K.S., Leven, M.R., Wilson, K.D.P. and Yu, Y.T. (2002).
Wild Animals to Watch: Terrestrial and Freshwater Fauna of Conservation Concern
in
Mott MacDonald (2011). Agreement No. CE 65/2009 (HY) Proposed Road Improvement
Works in
Ove Arup (2005).
14.10 Landscape and Visual Impact
14.10.1 Introduction
The landscape and visual impact assessment (LVIA)
has been conducted in accordance with the requirements of Annexes 10 and 18 of the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact
Assessment Process (EIAO-TM); the EIAO Guidance Note No. 8/2010 - Preparation of Landscape and Visual Impact
Assessment, and the requirements stated in Section 3.4.12 and Appendix H of the EIA
Study Brief (No. ESB-237/2011).
The purpose of this LVIA is to:
¡ Define the existing landscape and
visual quality of the Assessment Area;
¡ Identify key landscape and visual
resources as well as landscape and visually sensitive receivers (VSRs);
¡ Identify and evaluate the
potential landscape and visual impacts associated with the Project during both
construction and operation phases;
¡ Define significance and magnitude
of the landscape and visual impacts before and after mitigation;
¡ Propose mitigation measures to
reduce the impact on the existing landscape and visual quality; and
¡ Describe the implementation, maintenance and management of these recommended mitigation measures.
14.10.2 Landscape and Visual Legislations, Standards and Guidelines
The
following legislation, standards and guidelines are applicable to the
evaluation of landscape and visual impacts associated with the construction and
operation phases of the underpass road serving
the WKCD Development.
¡ Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (Cap. 499, Section 16);
¡ EIAO Guidance Note No. 8/2010: Preparation of Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment under the
Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance;
¡
¡ Approved South West Kowloon Outline Zoning Plan No. S/K20/28 gazetted on
08/01/2013;
¡ Approved West Kowloon
Cultural District Development Plan No.S/K20/WKCD/2 gazetted on 08/01/2013;
¡ Landscape Value Mapping
Study in Hong Kong;
¡ WBTC No. 7/2002 -Tree Planting in Public Works;
¡ WBTC No. 14/2002
-Management and Maintenance of Natural Vegetation and Landscape Works, and Tree
Preservation;
¡ ETWB TCW No. 11/2004 on Cyber
Manual for Greening;
¡ ETWB TCW No. 3/2006 -Tree Preservation;
¡ ETWB TCW No. 2/2004 -Maintenance of Vegetation and Hard Landscape
Features;
¡ ETWB TCW No. 29/2004 – Registration of Old and Valuable Trees, and
Guidelines for their Preservation;
¡ Planning Study on the
Harbour and its Waterfront Areas (February 2003);
¡ Environmental Impact
Assessment Study Brief No. ESB-197/2008 -Hong Kong Section of
Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail link (XRL) (November 2008);
¡ Environmental Impact
Assessment Study Brief No. ESB-202/2009 -Road Works at West Kowloon (April
2009);
¡ Environmental Impact
Assessment of Hong Kong Section of Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail
Link (May 2009)
¡ Environmental Impact
Assessment of Hong Kong Section of Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail
Link -Environmental Impact Assessment Report Executive Summary (May 2009);
¡ Greening Master Plan for
Mong Kok and Yau Ma Tei; and
¡ Greening Master Plan for
Tsim Sha Tsui.
14.10.2.1 Review of Relevant Guidelines on Landscape Strategies
and Framework and Land Use Zoning
Relevant planning documents have been
reviewed to gain an insight to the planning intentions of the site and its
surroundings so as to assess whether the Project can fit into the setting of
the project site and its surroundings as a whole.
The review of the relevant guidelines on landscape
strategies and framework, and urban design for the proposed WKCD development is
useful to gain an understanding of the planning and design intention of the
surrounding areas and this is provided in Section 10.2.1.
In order to have a better understanding of
the envisaged future landscape and visual characters/ context of the project
site, the land use zoning and planning intentions of the project site has also
been examined.
The
site for the underpass road is
located within the WKCD site as
shown in Figure
14.1.1. It is currently zoned as “Other Specified
Uses” annotated “Arts, Cultural, Entertainment, Commercial and Other Uses”
under the Approved West Kowloon Cultural District Development Plan
No.S/K20/WKCD/2. Combined with the
proposed WKCD basement, it comprises approximately 15 ha of land bordering the
Jordan/Tsim Sha Tsui area. The planning intention of this zone is primarily for
the provision of arts and cultural facilities supported by a range of mixed
office, hotel, retail, dining, recreational and entertainment uses.
The project site is currently occupied by
works sites, local roads, temporary storage/packing facilities, some existing
infrastructure and utility facilities, the existing Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station
and the work site and temporary works areas for the Hong Kong Section of the
Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL) project. The proposed
underpass road links up
14.10.3 Assessment Methodology
The
preparation of this LVIA follows the criteria stated in the Annexes 10 and 18 of the Technical
Memorandum to the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO), the EIAO Guidance Note No. 8/2010 - Preparation
of Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and the report of Landscape Value Mapping of Hong Kong for evaluating and assessing
the landscape and visual impacts associated with the proposed underpass road.
Relevant
planning documents have been reviewed to gain an insight to the planning
intentions of the site and its
surroundings so as to assess whether the Project can fit into the setting of
the site and its surroundings as a whole.
14.10.3.1 Assessment
Area
The scope for defining the Assessment Areas for Landscape Impact Assessment (LIA) and Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) are as follows:
Landscape
Impact Assessment (LIA): In accordance with the Study Brief and EIAO Guidance Note No. 8/2010, the
Landscape Impact Assessment area covers all areas within 500m from the boundary
of the underpass road project.
This extent is illustrated in Figure 14.10.1.
Visual Impact Assessment (VIA): According to the EIAO Guidance Note No. 8/2010, the assessment area of the Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) covers the visual envelope which is the viewshed formed by natural or man made features such as ridgeline or building blocks. It also includes all terrestrial and aquatic areas within the visual envelope of the Project. The defined visual envelope is shown on Figure 14.10.8.
14.10.3.2 Baseline Survey and Assessment of Landscape
Impacts
1: Identification of Key Landscape Resources and Landscape Character Areas (LCAs) within the Assessment Area
A baseline survey of the existing landscape resources (LRs) and
landscape character areas (LCAs), comprising a desktop study of relevant
background reports and a comprehensive field study, is undertaken. This aims to
obtain information on topography and existing vegetation for further analysis.
Two categories of Landscape Resources, including
Physical and Human Landscape Resources, are classified
within the Assessment Area. Physical Landscape Resources include physical
topography, water body (i.e.
The conditions of the landscape resources
and resources contribute to the overall character of the site and its
surroundings. The LCAs represent broad tracts of landscape which have been
determined with consideration of topography, vegetation types and land use
patterns. The Landscape Value Mapping
Study in Hong Kong will be reviewed to gain an understanding of the
landscape characters within the Assessment Area.
2: Assessment of the Sensitivity of the Landscape Resources (LRs) and Landscape Character Areas (LCAs)
The individual LRs
/LCAs that have been identified are described qualitatively and quantitatively.
Their sensitivities are then evaluated and rated as low, medium or high based
on the following factors:
¡ Quality of landscape
characters/resources;
¡ Importance and rarity of special
landscape resources;
¡ Ability of the landscape to
accommodate change;
¡ Significance of the change in local
and regional context; and
¡ Maturity of the landscape.
The sensitivity rating for
each LR / LCA are
determined based on the following:
Low |
Landscape
or landscape resource, the nature of which is largely tolerant to change |
Medium |
Landscape
or landscape resource of moderately valued landscape characteristics
reasonably tolerant to change |
High |
Important
landscape or landscape resource of particularly distinctive character or high
importance, sensitive to relatively small changes |
3: Identification of Potential Source and Type of Impacts
Various elements of the construction works
and operation procedures that would generate landscape impacts are identified.
4: Assessment of the Magnitude of Landscape Impacts
The factors
affecting the magnitude of change in assessing landscape impacts are as follows:
¡ Compatibility of the project with
the surrounding landscape;
¡ Duration of impacts under
construction and operation phases;
¡ Scale of development; and
¡ Reversibility of change.
The magnitude
of change rating for each LR / LCA are determined based on the following:
Negligible |
The
LRs/LCAs would suffer no discernible change by the proposed development |
Small |
The
LRs/LCAs would suffer slight or barely perceptible changes by the proposed
development |
Intermediate |
The
LRs/LCAs would suffer a moderate change by the proposed development |
Large |
The
LRs/LCAs would suffer a major change by the proposed development |
5:
Identification of
Potential Landscape Mitigation Measures
Potential mitigation measures are developed to avoid or reduce the adverse landscape impacts derived
from the WKCD development, which also include enhancement of the landscape
and visual quality. Remedial measures will be recommended such as tree
preservation measures, and compensatory measures such as the implementation of
landscape design measures (e.g. compensatory planting and landscape treatment etc.) to compensate
for unavoidable adverse impacts and/or generate potentially beneficial long
term impacts.
6:
Prediction of the
Significance of Landscape Impacts Before and After the Implementation of the
Mitigation Measures
Landscape impacts will be classified
depending on whether the impacts are adverse/beneficial, and
irreversible/reversible. Significance threshold of residual impact before and after mitigation (Day 1 and Year 10) will be assessed under the following
categories:
Insubstantial |
No
discernible change to the existing landscape quality |
Slight |
Adverse/
beneficial impact where the proposed development would cause a barely
perceptible deterioration/improvement to existing landscape quality |
Moderate |
Adverse/
beneficial impact where the proposed development would cause a noticeable
deterioration/improvement to existing landscape quality |
Substantial: |
Adverse/
beneficial impact where the proposed development would cause significant
deterioration/improvement to existing landscape quality |
The impact significance will also be
determined. Table 14.10.1 shows the
relationship between sensitivity and magnitude of change.
Table 14.10.1: Impact significance - relationship between sensitivity and magnitude of change
Magnitude
of Change caused by the proposed development |
Sensitivity |
||
Low |
Medium |
High |
|
Large |
Moderate |
Moderate/Substantial |
Substantial |
Intermediate |
Slight/Moderate |
Moderate |
Moderate/ Substantial |
Small |
Slight |
Slight/Moderate |
Moderate |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
7: Residual
Impacts Assessment
Residual impacts are those impacts remaining
after the proposed mitigation measures have been implemented. This often refers
to 10 to 15 years of operation, when the planting mitigation measures are
considered to have reached a level of maturity, which allow them to perform the
intended design objectives.
In accordance with
Annex 10 of the EIAO TM, an overall assessment also includes an
assessment of the residual landscape and visual impacts for the project. The assessment categories for the residual
landscape impacts are shown in Table 14.10.2.
Table
14.10.2: Assessment categories for residual impact
Beneficial |
Acceptable |
Acceptable with mitigation measures |
Unacceptable |
Undetermined |
The impacts are beneficial if the proposed development will complement the landscape character of its setting, follow the relevant planning objectives and improve overall and visual quality |
The impacts are acceptable if the assessment indicates that there will be no significant impacts on the landscape, no significant adverse visual impacts caused by the appearance of the proposed development, or no interference with key views. |
The impacts are acceptable with mitigation measures, if there will be some adverse impacts, but these can be eliminated, reduced or offset to a large extent by specific mitigation measures |
The impacts are unacceptable if the adverse impacts are considered too excessive and are unable to mitigate practically |
The impacts are undetermined if the significant adverse impacts are likely, but the extent to which they may occur or may be mitigated or cannot be determined from the study. Further detailed study will be required for the individual impact in question. |
14.10.3.3 Baseline Survey and Assessment of Visual
Impacts
1: Identification of Visual Resources and Visually Sensitive Receivers (VSRs)
Visual resources and key visually sensitive receivers (VSRs) within
the Visual Envelope and primary zone
of visual influence which would be affected by the Project will be identified. The Notes and Explanatory Statement of Approved West
Kowloon Cultural District Development Plan No.S/K20/WKCD/2 and Hong
Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines – Chapter 11 Urban Design Guidelines are
reviewed to identify the VSRs. Minimum viewing distance of each VSRs are also determined.
2:
Assessment of Sensitivity
of Visually
Sensitive Receivers (VSRs)
Visual sensitivity considers the impact on views to the site from the VSRs. A number of
factors affecting the sensitivity
of VSRs for evaluation of visual impacts are as follows:
1 |
Value
and quality of exiting views |
2 |
Availability
and amenity of alternative views |
3 |
Type
and estimated number of receiver population (many, medium and few) |
4 |
Duration
(long/ medium/ short) and frequency of view (frequent/ occasional/ rare) |
5 |
Degree
of visibility (no view, glimpse, partial view, vista, open view, and
panoramic view) |
The
sensitivity rating for the VSR are determined as follows:
High: |
The VSR is highly
sensitive to any changes in their viewing experience. |
Medium: |
The VSR is moderately sensitive
to any changes in their viewing experience. |
Low: |
The VSR is only slightly
sensitive to any changes in their viewing experience. |
3:
Identification of Potential Sources
of Visual Impacts
Various elements located within the site that would generate visual impacts during construction and operation phases will be identified.
4: Assessment of Potential
Magnitude of Visual Impacts
Visual impacts are determined by evaluating the conditions of the existing landscape and visual character of the site and its surroundings, as well as the degree of integration of the Project’s components with the existing landscape. Other major factors affecting the magnitude of change for assessing visual impacts are:
1 |
Scale
of development |
2 |
Compatibility
of the Project with the surrounding landscape |
3 |
Reversibility
of change |
4 |
Viewing
distance |
5 |
Potential
blocking of view |
6 |
Duration
of impacts under construction and operation phases |
7 |
Night glare effect |
The potential
magnitude of change is classified into four categories:
Negligible |
The
VSRs are likely to suffer no discernible change in their viewing experience |
Small |
The
VSRs are likely to suffer a slight change in their viewing experience |
Intermediate |
The
VSRs are likely to suffer a moderate change in their viewing experience |
Large |
The
VSRs are likely to suffer a significant change in their viewing experience |
5:
Determination of the Visual
Impacts during Construction and Operation Phases before Implementation of Mitigation Measures
The
significance of the visual impacts is categorised as follows:
Insubstantial |
No discernible
change to the existing visual quality |
Slight |
Adverse /
beneficial impact where the Project would cause a barely perceptible
deterioration/ improvement to existing visual quality |
Moderate |
Adverse / beneficial
impact where the Project would cause a noticeable deterioration/ improvement
to existing visual quality |
Substantial |
Adverse / beneficial
impact where the Project would cause significant deterioration/ improvement
to existing visual quality |
The impact significance will be determined.
Table
14.10.3 shows the
relationship between sensitivity and magnitude of change.
Table 14.10.3: Impact significance – relationship
between sensitivity and magnitude of change
Magnitude of Change |
Sensitivity |
||
Low |
Medium |
High |
|
Large |
Moderate |
Moderate/Substantial |
Substantial |
Intermediate |
Slight/Moderate |
Moderate |
Moderate/
Substantial |
Small |
Slight |
Slight/Moderate |
/Moderate |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
The assessment of visual impacts will be
presented in a matrix format considering the factors including location of
visually sensitive receivers (VSRs), type and approximate number of VSRs,
description of existing view and degree of visibility of DP, receiver
sensitivity, source of impact, minimum viewing distance of VSRs, magnitude of
change, significance thresholds of potential visual impact (before mitigation),
mitigation measures, and significance thresholds of residual impact (upon
mitigation) during operation phase on Day 1 and in Year 10.
6: Examination of Alternative Design(s) and
Construction Method(s)
Before adopting other mitigation measures to
alleviate the impacts, alternative design(s) and construction method(s) that
would avoid or reduce the impacts on landscape and visual amenity, or that
would make the Project visually more compatible with the setting has been
examined.
7. Recommendation of Mitigation
Measures to Minimize Adverse Visual Impacts
Mitigation strategies will be developed to reduce the overall
visual impacts derived from the Project
during construction and operation phases.
8: Residual Impacts
Assessment
Residual
impacts from the Project are assessed
based on the 5 categories for residual visual impacts including “Beneficial”, “Acceptable”,
“Acceptable with Mitigation Measures”, “Unacceptable” and “Undetermined”
(see Table 14.10.2).
9: Assessment of Cumulative
l Impacts
Cumulative impacts of the concurrent projects
on landscape resources, landscape character areas and visual amenity will be
assessed.
Graphics Presentation
The findings of this LVIA are presented and supported by a range of illustrative materials such as computer-generated photomontages, aerial photograph, photographs and plans etc. The location of the underpass and the associated above ground structures are provided.
14.10.3.4 Scope and Content of the Project
The underpass road is an integral part of WKCD
basement structure, serving as a centralised road network to connect all Arts
and Cultural Facilities (CACF) and Other Arts and Cultural Facilities (OACF) as
well as hotel, offices and residential (HOR) facilitates and provide
major entry and exit points to and from the WKCD. The original design of the
proposed underpass road is based on Foster + Partners Conceptual Plan (CP) for
the WKCD, which aims to provide a people-oriented and traffic free environment
at ground level and integrate the east – west road within the WKCD basement.
The underpass road is located mainly on the WKCD Basement Level 1, except at
the vehicular access points where the underpass road connects to existing
ground level roads adjacent to the WKCD site. The proposed underpass
road is comprised of three distinct sections (shown in Figure 14.2.1). More details on descriptions of the Project are
provided in Section 14.2.2.
It is
noted that the baseline conditions are not static and may change over time. The
proposed underpass road is targeted to
commence construction in 2013, so as to commission the Phase 1 arts and
cultural facilities in stages starting from 2014/2015. It is assumed that
construction of the proposed underpass road will be undertaken at the same time
with the construction of the WKCD basement. The construction of the proposed
underpass road will be divided into different zones at different times, with
some of the WKCD buildings also undergoing construction at the same time.
Given that all underground activities and
facilities would unlikely impose landscape and visual impacts, only potential
landscape and visual impacts associated with surface construction activities
and above ground permanent structures have been assessed.
The locations of the proposed ventilation shafts
associated with the underpass road and a cross section of the temporary stand
alone ventilation shafts are provided in Figure 14.10.10 and Figure 14.10.11.
14.10.3.5 Benefits of the Project
The
main purpose of the underpass road
is to serve as one of the key measures to meet the “accessibility and connectivity” objective of the WKCD
development mentioned in Section
14.2.3. Specifically, the purpose of the proposed underpass road is to connect
the east and west of the site, which allows efficient and effective movement
within the WKCD.
In addition to reducing the noise impacts on
the WKCD and residential developments nearby, it is expected that the Project
will bring more environmental benefits to the area than other design options. As
the main spine of the vehicular network within the WKCD site, locating this at
basement level will free up more space at ground level to maximise
pedestrianisation and allow for provision of landscaping and planting which enhances the landscape and visual amenity of the WKCD development during operation phase.
14.10.3.6 Major Limitations of the Assessment
To meet the requirements of the TM of the EIAO, 23 VSRs within the Visual Envelope are identified for adequately assessing the visual impacts derived by the proposed underpass road and the associated ground structures. However, only viewpoints which can represent the worst-case scenarios from the most sensitive VSRs, or those which are representative in terms of the location are selected for preparing photomontages.
Due
to the delayed relocation of the Tsim
Sha Tsui Fire Station, the access point at Canton Road will not be constructed
until after relocation of the fire station, and an interim access point will be
provided at Austin Road West until the permanent access point at Canton Road is
constructed, after which the interim access road will be closed off
permanently.
It is noted that the baseline conditions are
not static and may change over time. Due to the phased implementation of the CACF,
there will be a transition period after completion of the WKCD basement when
the majority of the Phase 1 CACF are completed, but
the rest (including office/residential buildings which are subject to land
sale) are yet to be initiated. During this transition period, temporary
ventilation shafts for the WKCD basement associated with the underpass road will
be present at the site prior to completion of the CACF. However, the
CACF buildings will be well
designed to visually hide the ventilation shafts, so the ventilation shafts will form part of the CACF buildings and
they will no longer be visible as individual structures once all CACF are
completed.
As these structures are temporary and given
that the design of these ventilation shafts is yet to be confirmed, the
potential visual impacts during the transition period will be briefly described
as part of construction phase and operation phase (Day 1) in this visual impact
assessment.
14.10.4 Baseline Study
The proposed underpass
road forms part of the infrastructure and supporting facilities for the WKCD
development, particularly it serves as an integral part of the WKCD basement
structure. The project site is located within the WKCD site, which is currently
occupied by work sites, local roads, temporary
storage, parking facilities, some existing infrastructure and utility
facilities, the existing Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station and the works site and
temporary works areas for the Hong Kong Section of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong
Kong Express Rail Link (XRL) project. The underpass road is mainly located at
basement level, and 3 access points are provided to connect with the underpass
road.
Currently, the
landscape setting of the site is mainly comprised of open spaces with some
roadside amenity planting. Trees are scattered within the site, mainly at the
western side (near Western Harbour Tunnel Entrance), and some trees are located
at the eastern side (in front of Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station). Most of the landscape resources with high value are located along the
periphery area outside the site boundary. Two significant landscape resources
within the assessment area are
Landscape Resources are
classified into two categories including Physical Landscape Resources and Human
Landscape Resources. The
surrounding landscape resources mainly consist of developed area and a water
body (i.e.
14.10.4.1 Physical Landscape Resources
Topography
The landform of the landscape impact assessment area which is the West Kowloon Cultural District comprises flat reclaimed land with no features of topographical interest or value.
Open Space
The
site currently comprises 1.6 ha of temporary open space including a waterfront
promenade along the
14.10.4.2 Human Landscape Resources
Cultural Heritage and Historical Features
The site
is a reclaimed land that does not contain any cultural heritage features or
landscape with important history,
however, there are cultural heritage features found within the assessment area
outside the WKCD site boundary.
Important cultural/religious built heritage
features within the assessment area includes the Kowloon Mosque and Islamic
Centre, St. Andrew’s Church. For the historical features,
14.10.4.3 Existing Tree within the Assessment Area
A
broad brush tree/vegetation
survey has been carried out within the assessment area as shown in Figure 14.10.4.
Within the study area, there is approximately 3567 no. of trees. Many of the trees
are found within public open spaces or are roadside trees or trees with amenity
planting area. They are mostly exotic and common species with low to medium
amenity value and poor to good condition. Trees with high amenity value and
good health condition are mostly located in nearby parks, e.g. Kowloon Park
and King George V Memorial Park, etc,
are located outside the study area. Tree
species include Acacia auriculiformis,
Acacia confusa, Ailanthus fordii, Albizia lebbeck, Aleurites
moluccana, Alstonia scholaris, Aquilaria sinensis, Archontophoenix alexandrae,
Bauhinia x blakeana, Senna siamea, Senna surattensis, Casuarina equisetifolia,
Carica papaya, Cassia fistula, Caryota mitis, Celtis sinensis, Cinnamomum
camphora, Chrysalidocarpus lutescens, Clausena lansium, Crateva unilocularis, Delonix
regia, Ficus benjamina, Ficus elastica, Ficus microcarpa, Ficus superba, Ficus
virens, Grevillea robusta, Hibiscus tiliaceus, Khaya senegalensis, Koelreuteria
bipinnata, Lagerstroemia speciosa, Leucaena leucocephala, Litsea glutinosa,
Livistona chinensis, Macaranga tanarius, Mangifera indica, Melaleuca
quinquenervia,, Melia azedarach, Morus alba, Peltophorum pterocarpum,
Plumeria rubra, Phoenix roebelenii, Pinus elliottii, Reevesia thyrsoidea,
Roystonea regia, Syzygium cumini, Terminalia mantaly, and Washingtonia robusta.
There are a total of 45 affected trees due
to the construction of the underpass road. All of them are found within the
site boundary of WKCD. Trees affected are mostly located at the eastern
side, in front of Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station and within the central area of
WKCD. Dominant tree species
within the site boundary include Acacia
auriculiformis, Acacia confusa, Archontophoenix alexandrae, Bauhinia spp., Casuarina, equisetifolia, Carica
papaya, Celtis sinensis, Ficus benjamina, Ficus microcarpa, Ficus
virens, Hibiscus tiliaceus, Koelreuteria bipinnata, Leucaena leucocephala, Livistona chinensis, Melia azedarach, Morus alba and
A list of landscape resources and their
sensitivity is shown in Table
14.10.4. Lists of baseline
landscape resources during construction phase and operation phase are mapped in
Figure
14.10.1. Photo records are shown in Figure 14.10.3a to Figure
14.10.3o.
Table 14.10.4: Landscape Resources and Sensitivity
Ref. No. |
Baseline Landscape Resources |
Sensitivity (High, Medium and Low) |
Physical Landscape Resources LR1: Open Space |
||
LR1.1 |
This
is the major public open space (~13.3 ha) in the district located South of
Austin Road, West of Nathan Road and North of Haiphong Road. This is a
popular recreation area and sightseeing point for residents and visitors. The
park offers a full range of active and passive recreational facilities to the
public. This LR contains many special landscape elements that are important
in both district and regional context. Due
to topographical and other site constraints, the northern part of There
are approximately 1,500 trees with more than 90 tree species. There are a
total of 51 Old and Valuable Trees (OVT) of high amenity value located in
Kowloon Park with height around 14-18m, crown spread around 12-18m and DBH
around 900-1500. Tree conditions
range from poor to good. The
following recreation grounds are found within the park: n This is an open space (~0.3 ha) that is predominantly
hard surfaced and primarily for active recreation purposes. A 7-a-side soccer
pitch is the main element in the open space. Seating areas are provided at
the western side of the pitch. The pitch is directly next to 2 OVTs in n This is a multi-purpose centre for sports
activities, such as indoor game
centre and swimming pools located within n The Centre occupies the historic Blocks S61 and
S62 of the former Whitfield Barracks at |
High |
LR1.3 |
This
is an open space (~0.2 ha) located next to |
Medium |
LR1.4 |
This
is a roof top garden (~0.46 ha) located on top of the Hong Kong China Ferry
Terminal. Generally hard paved with trees and shrubs in raised planter and a seating area arranged on
the edge of the roof. A dolphin sculpture is located at the centre of the
garden. The usage rate is generally low. There are 21 young to semi-mature trees
with height around 4-8m, crown spread around 2-4m
and DBH around 200-400mm. The amenity value of these trees
are medium. Tree species mainly consist of Ficus benjamina, Livistona chinensis and
|
Medium |
LR1.5 |
This
is an open space (~0.2 ha) located next to |
High |
LR1.6 |
This
is an open space (~0.06 ha) that is predominantly hard surfaced and primarily
for active recreation purposes. 2 badminton courts are the main element in
the open space. Seating areas are provided. There are 6 young to semi-mature trees with height around 3-14m, crown
spread 2-8m and DBH 100-250mm. Amenity value is considered as high. Predominant tree species include Ailanthus fordii and |
High |
LR1.7 |
Temporary
open space along the waterfront promenade within the site boundary This is a temporary open space (~1.6 ha) located along the waterfront promenade within the site boundary. It consists of a cycling track, children’s play equipment and seating areas under trellis primarily for passive recreation purposes. There are mainly shrub planting (Brassia actinophylla, Lantana camara, Hibiscus rosa-sinensis, Alternanthera paronychioides and Juniperus chinensis cv. Kaizuka), groundcover (Ophipogon japonicus and Hymenocallis speciosa) and lawn area with lighting along pedestrian path. This area is well-maintained and the condition of the plants is fair. The amenity value is medium as most plant species are flowering species. |
Medium |
LR1.8 |
This
is an open space (~1.36 ha) located in the It includes a recreation playground (~0.3 ha) that is predominantly hard surfaced and primarily for active recreation purposes. One 7-a-side soccer pitch and one basketball court are the main elements in the open space. The playground also provides a venue for temporary Chinese traditional activities such as the Yu Lan Festival. |
High |
LR1.15 |
Public
Open Space at the podium of This is a public open space (~1 ha) within
the private development at the podium of Kowloon Station. It includes a large
piazza area with some water features. There are approximately 30 young to
semi-mature trees located at the
public open space, with height around 4-6m, crown 4-5m and DBH around
95-100mm. Amenity value is medium. The tree condition is fair. Species
consists of |
Medium |
Physical Landscape Resources LR2: Amenity planting |
||
LR2.1 |
Roadside
There
are approximately 45 roadside young to mature roadside trees in raised planters with shrub and groundcover (~0.28ha) found
along Park Lane Shopper’s Boulevard, Nathan Road with height ranging from
10-16m, crown spread between 9-22m and DBH between 550-1400mm. 34 trees are
listed in the Register of Old and Valuable Tree (OVT) (Including LCSD YTM/31
which was felled on 06 August 2011). Some of these OVTs were planted when |
High |
LR2.2 |
Roadside
There are 10 young roadside trees with shrub found along Observatory Road with height around 8-10m, crown spread around 4-8m and DBH around 150-300mm. Amenity value is considered to be medium. Predominant tree species include Khaya senegalensis. The condition of the trees is fair. |
Medium |
LR2.3 |
Amenity
There
are total 38 young to semi-mature trees found near the Police Station.
Approximately 21 trees in raised planter with shrubs (~0.11ha) along the |
Medium |
LR2.5 |
Roadside
Trees along There are 6 young roadside trees found in front of Lippo Sun Plaza with height around 8m, crown spread around 4m and DBH around 120-350mm. Amenity value is considered to be medium. Predominant tree species is Cinnamomum camphora. The condition of the trees is fair. |
Medium |
LR2.6 |
Roadside
There
are approximately 35 young to mature trees with shrub and groundcover found on the slope (~0.16ha) along |
High |
LR2.7 |
Amenity
Planting Strip along This are 28 semi-mature roadside trees, with shrubs along an amenity planting strip (~0.06ha) separating the Kowloon Park Drive, with height 8-11m, crown spread 1-3m and DBH 350-500mm. Tree species are predominantly Araucaria heterophylla, Chrysalidocarpus lutescens, and Roystonea regia. The condition of the trees is fair and the amenity value is medium. |
Medium |
LR2.8 |
Trees along There are approximately 60 young to semi-mature roadside trees with shrubs in both at grade and raised planter (~0.17ha) along Canton Road to Kowloon Park Drive with height ranging from 5-16m, crown spread 4-8m and DBH 100-300mm. Some planting area are located under underpass road. Amenity value is considered to be medium. Tree species mainly include Aleurites moluccana, Alstonia scholaris, Delonix regia and Ficus microcarpa. Tree condition is fair. |
Medium |
LR2.9 |
Roadside
There are approximately 15 young to semi-mature roadside trees in front of Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station with height ranging from 4-15m, crown spread 3-12m and DBH 135-650mm. Amenity value is considered to be medium. 1 Ficus microcarpa, is found near the TST Fire Station within the site boundary, with height 11m, crow spred 11m and DBH 941mm. Predominant tree species include Acacia confusa, Aleurites moluccana, Ficus elastica, Ficus microcarpa, Macaranga tanarius, Litsea glutinosa, Clausena lansium and Morus alba. The condition of the trees is fair. |
Medium |
LR2.10 |
Roadside
Trees along Scout Path There are 10 young roadside trees located along Scout Path with height around 4-5m, crown spread 2-4m and DBH around 100mm. Amenity value is considered to be medium. Tree species mainly consist of Senna siamea, Ficus benjamina and Peltophorum pterocarpum. The condition of the trees is fair. |
Medium |
LR2.11 |
Roadside
There
are total 46 young to semi-mature roadside trees with shrubs in at grade
planter (~0.09ha) located along the
Austin Road, of which approximately 11 young trees located in front of Austin
Station, with height around 4-10m, crown spread 4-6m and DBH around
120-200mm. Amenity value is considered to be medium. Predominant species are Aleurites
moluccana, Bischofia javanica, Crateva unilocularis, Ficus benjaminia and Spathodea campanulata. The condition of the trees range from
poor to fair. |
Medium |
LR2.13 |
Roadside
There are total 20 young roadside trees
along Nathan Road, of which 13 street trees with shrub in both at grade and
raised planter (~0.02ha) located in front of HSH Kowloon Centre with height
around 2-5m, crown spread 1-4m and DBH around 100-150mm and 7 roadside trees
located along both side of Nathan Road (in front of Nathan Hotel) with height
around 4-8.5m, crown spread 2-4m and DBH around 95-200mm. Amenity value is
medium. Predominant tree species are Cinnamomum burmannii, Livistona
chinensis and Brachychiton acerifolius. The condition of
the trees is fair. |
Medium |
LR2.14 |
Roadside
There are total 38 young to semi-mature roadside trees with shrubs in raised planter (~0.13ha) located along the Canton Road, of which 34 of them located in front of King George V Memorial Park and 4 of them located at the junction of Austin Road and Canton Road, with height ranging from 4-12m, crown spread 3-7m and DBH around 100-400mm. Amenity value is considered to be medium. Predominant species is Aleurites moluccana, Senna siamea, Ficus benjamina and Melaleuca quinquenervia. The condition of the trees range from poor to fair. |
Medium |
LR2.15 |
Roadside
There are approximately 25 young to semi-mature roadside trees located along Wui Cheung Road and the planter strip with height ranging from 4-10m, crown spread 1-4m and DBH around 120-200mm. Amenity value is considered to be low to medium. Predominant species is Cassia fistula, Ormosia pinnata and Roystonea regia. The condition of the trees range from poor to fair. |
Medium |
LR2.16 |
Roadside There are approximately 20 young to semi-mature street trees with shrub in at grade planter (~0.01ha), located along Jordan Road with height ranging from 6-12m, crown spread 3-10m and DBH around 120-200mm. Amenity value is considered to be medium. Predominant species is Delonix regia, Grevillea robusta, Khaya senegalensis and Michelia x alba. The condition of the trees range from poor to fair. |
Medium |
LR2.17 |
Roadside
plantation Close to There are approximately 58 young to semi-mature roadside trees located close to Jordan Road Carpark with shrubs in at grade planter (~0.11ha) with height ranging from 4-12m, crown spread 4-10m and DBH 100-550mm. Amenity value is considered to be low to medium. Predominant tree species include Senna surattensis, Ficus hispida, Hibiscus tiliaceus, Melia azedarach and large amount of Leucaena leucocephala, which is self-seeded weed species in nature. The condition of the trees range from poor to fair. |
Medium |
LR2.27 |
Amenity
Planting within the Private Development at There are amenity planting areas (~0.96ha)
within the private development at the podium of Kowloon Station, such as the
podium garden, private open space playground (~1.10ha) and along the access
road within the private development area. There are approximately 70 young to
semi-mature trees with shrubs
located within the private development, with height around 4-8m, crown 4.5-8m
and DBH around 120-210mm. Amenity value is considered to be medium. Predominant
species consists of |
Medium |
LR2.28 |
Roadside
Plantation along Western Harbour Crossing Bus Stop near
Elements There
are approximately 54 young to semi-mature trees with shrub in at
grade planter (~0.18ha) between
Western Harbour Crossing Bus Stop and Elements with height around 3-8m, crown spread 1-4m and DBH 150-300mm. Some trees grow under the shade of the
Ngo Cheung Road Underpass road. Amenity value is considered to be medium. All trees are in fair condition. Tree species mainly consist of Crateva unilocularis, Ficus benjamina, Caryota mitis and Archontophoenix alexandrae.
|
Medium |
LR2.29 |
Roadside
There
are approximately 96 young to
semi-mature roadside trees with shrubs in raised planter (~0.65ha)along
Austin Road West with height ranging from 8-11m, crown spread 2-4m and DBH
100-350mm. Amenity value is considered as medium. Species include Bauhinia x blakeana, Senna siamea, Senna
surattensis, Celtis sinensis, Cinnamomum camphora, Crateva unilocularis, Ficus
benjamina, Ficus microcarpa, Ficus virens, Grevillea robusta, Lagerstroemia
speciosa, Peltophorum pterocarpum, Syzygium cumini and Terminalia mantaly. The condition of the trees range from
poor to fair. |
Medium |
LR2.30 |
Roadside
There
are approximately 24 young trees
with shrub in raised planter
(~0.04ha) around the Administration Building with height around 8-11m,
crown spread around 2m and DBH around 200mm. Amenity value is considered to
be medium. Predominant tree species
is Archontophoenix alexandrae. The condition of the trees is fair. |
Medium |
LR2.31 |
Trees Buffering This
is a tree buffer area (~1.67ha) located
at the entrance of Western Harbour Tunnel. The tree buffer was developed when
the former Urban Council instituted planting measures at the eastern edge of
the site abutting the portal of the Western Harbour Crossing. There are
approximately 250 young to
semi-mature trees, of which
150 no. of trees are found within the site boundary, with height
around 8-10m, crown spread around 4-5m and DBH around 250-400mm. Amenity
value is considered to be low to medium. Tree species include Acacia auriculiformis,
Acacia confusa, Hibiscus tiliaceus, Casuarina equisetifolia, Ficus benjamina,
Ficus microcarpa, and a considerable amount of self-seeded weed species Leucaena leucocephala. The condition of the trees range from
poor to fair. |
Medium |
LR2.32 |
Roadside
Plantation along Western Harbour Crossing Bus Stop next to New Yau Ma
Tei Typhoon Shelter There
are approximately 22 young to
semi-mature trees with shrub in at grade planter (~0.03ha) next
to the New Yau Ma Tei Typhoon Shelter with height around 8-10m, crown spread
4-5m and DBH 150-300mm. Amenity value is considered to be medium. Predominant tree species is Acacia confusa. The condition of the trees range from poor
to fair. |
Medium |
LR2.33 |
Trees along New Yau Ma Tei Typhoon
Shelter Pier There
are approximately 20 young to
semi-mature trees with shrubs and grassland along
the typhoon shelter pier with height around 4-5m, crown spread 3-4m and DBH
150-300mm. Amenity value is considered to be medium. Predominant species are Carica papaya, Ficus microcarpa,
Koelreuteria bipinnata and self-seeded weed species Leucaena leucocephala. Also, there are more than 30 undersized
self-seeded weed Leucaena leucocephala. The condition of the trees range from
poor to fair. |
Medium |
LR2.34 |
Amenity
Planting within Salt Water Pumping Station There
are total 65 young to mature trees with grassland (~ 0.08ha) located
within and next to the Salt Water Pumping Station with height around 2-10m,
crown spread 2-5m and DBH around 95-300mm. Approximately 30 trees are located
in planter boxes (1m X 1mX 1m) and planting area within the pumping station
and 35 trees with grassland (~0.8ha) are located near the pump station.
Amenity value is considered to be low since most of the trees are self-seeded
weed species. Predominant tree species
are Leucaena leucocephala, Livistona chinensis,
Bauhinia spp., Ficus microcarpa, Hibiscus tiliaceus and Washingtonia robusta. The condition of the trees range from
poor to fair. |
Low |
LR2.35 |
Tree Cluster in the Western Part within
the Boundary Area There
are approximately 161 young to
semi-mature trees with grassland (~1.41ha) located
in the western part of the site with height around 6-10m, crown spread 3-10m
and DBH 95-200mm. Amenity value is considered to be low since most of the
trees are self-seeded species with a considerable amount of Leucaena leucocephala which is a weed
species. Tree species mainly
consist of Leucaena leucocephala, Hibiscus tiliaceus, Acacia auriculiformis,
Caryota mitis and Morus alba. The condition of the trees range from
poor to fair. |
Low |
LR2.36 |
Tree Cluster in the Eastern Part within
the Boundary Area There
are approximately 372 young to
semi-mature trees with grassland (~1.54ha) located
in the eastern part of the site with height around 5-10m, crown spread 3-10m
and DBH around 95-200mm. Amenity value is considered to be medium. A
considerable amount of Leucaena leucocephala,
which is weed species, is surveyed. Tree
species mainly consist of Leucaena
leucocephala, Casuarina equisetifolia, Melia azedarach, Hibiscus tiliaceus,
Acacia auriculiformis, Ficus microcarpa, Ficus virens, Morus alba and Celtis sinensis The condition of the trees range from poor to fair. |
Medium |
LR2.37 |
Amenity
Planting at the end of Ashley Road There
are approximately 2 young trees with shrub planted in the at-grade small planter (~0.007ha) located at the end of Ashley Road, which is
in front of Daily House, with height around 4-4.5m, crown spread 4.5-6m
and DBH around 95-100mm.
Amenity value is medium. Species
consist of Elaeocarpus apiculatus
and Elaeocarpus hainanensis. The
condition of the trees is fair. |
Medium |
Physical Landscape Resources LR3: Waterbody |
||
LR3.1 |
Lying
in the middle of the territory's dense urban region, the harbour is famous
for its deep and sheltered waters. It is a valuable natural asset of |
High |
Human Landscape Resources LR4: Cultural Heritage and Historical
Features |
||
LR4.1 |
Kowloon Mosque and Islamic Centre is one of
the four principal mosques in There are approximately 3 semi-mature trees with found near the entrance of the
Kowloon Mosque and Islamic Centre, along the Nathan Road, with height ranging
from 6-15m, crown spread between 408m and DBH between 200-400mm. Predominant
tree species includes Cinnamomum
camphora and Mangifera
indica. The condition of the trees is fair. The amenity value for the trees is medium. |
High |
LR4.2 |
St.
Andrew’s Church and St. Andrew Church was built in 1906 and is
located at the bustling There are total 50 young to semi-mature trees
found within the Church, of which approximately 20 trees are located on the
slope area along the Nathan Road, with height ranging from 8-15m, crown
spread 3-5m and DBH between 200-300mm. Predominant tree species includes Livistona chinensis and Bauhinia spp. Other 30 trees are
located in the amenity planting area within the Church, with height ranging
from 3-19m, crown spread 3-6m and DBH 150 -350mm. Predominant tree species
include Juniperus chinensis, Macaranga tanarius, Bauhinia spp., Lagerstroemia speciosa and Chrysalidocarpus
lutescens. The condition of the trees range from poor to fair. Also,
there are 4 trees found within the |
High |
LR4.3 |
This is a four-storey Verandah-type
Shophouse believed to have been erected in 1937 and was originally for mainly
residential use. In 1973, the building was purchased by a real estate
company, Tai Sang Land Development Limited, and has since been converted for
commercial use with various shops. This building has particular architectural
significance due to its Neo-Classical architectural style with balcony
details and parapet, which is now quite rare in |
Medium |
LR4.4 |
Built
Heritage within The Whitfield Barracks
was a designated military area in 1864, named after Major General H.W.
Whitfield, Major General The historic Blocks
S61 and S62 of the former Whitfield Barracks at Also located in |
High |
14.10.4.4
Landscape Character of the Assessment Area
According to the Landscape Character Map of Hong Kong
published by Planning Department in September 2003, the project site is
classified as “Reclamation/Ongoing Major Development Landscape” under the
category of “Urban Fringe Landscape”.
These are transitional
landscapes which are currently waiting or are undergoing large scale
construction or re-development. Part of the project site consists of land
undergoing development, while most of the site is vacant and awaiting
development. It is characterized by a flat, low, lying topography, lack of
significant vegetation or significant built structures. The site includes some
major earthworks and partially completed structures. It is part of the
The landscape character of the surrounding areas located to the east and the north of the site is
classified as an Urban Landscape type “Late 20 Century/ Early 21 Century
Commercial/Residential Complex Landscape”, comprising Hong Kong’s most recent
urban landscapes. The adjacent extensive comprehensive developments, such as
International Commercial Centre, the
Streets are wide with significant roadside
landscape provision and tree planting and with footbridges connecting
developments at the first floor or podium
level. The result is an intensely urban landscape which is enclosed, angular,
and colourful, and which is defined to a significant extent by its built form
and the spaces they create. It forms a typical urban setting of
Accordingly, the landscape character of the
surrounding assessment area varies from contemporary urban landscape,
transportation corridor landscape and coastal waters landscape.
WKCD is further
sub-divided in a number of sub-districts in accordance with the land use and
district identity. Therefore, during operation phase, the LCA01& LCA03 will
be further subdivided into a number of small LCAs in accordance with the sub-district
identity, and impact on these LCAs due to the underpass road serving
WKCD are assessed.
Baseline Landscape
Character Areas (LCAs)
The Landscape Character Areas are zoned with reference to the “Study of Landscape Value Mapping of Hong Kong”. Table 14.10.5 summarises the baseline LCAs and their sensitivity. The locations and photo records of the Landscape Character Areas during operation and construction period can be referred to in Figure 14.10.5, and Figure 14.10.7a to h.
Table 14.10.5: Landscape character areas and sensitivity
Ref. No. |
Baseline Landscape Character Areas |
Sensitivity (Low, Medium, High) |
LCA01 |
The approximate size of this LCA is 13.4ha. This area is where the Park would be
located in the proposed development. The topography is generally flat. This
area is open with clusters of trees. Tree plantation at the eastern edge of
the area abutting the portal of the Western Harbour Crossing was planted by
the former Urban Council. Elsewhere trees in this area are mostly self-seeded
weed species. This area has held some temporary exhibitions such as the |
Low |
LCA02 |
The approximate size of this LCA is 19.68ha. This area is currently under site formation and underground structure works. The landscape character is changing from time to time with construction operations. This LCA has no district or regional significance. |
Low |
LCA03 |
The approximate size of this LCA is 4.54ha. This area is currently opened to the public and allows activities along the waterfront. The temporary waterfront promenade provides basic recreation structures like seating area, children’s play area, bicycle track and kiosk to the public. Generally hard paved with shrub plantings, some facilitates in the area can easily be demolished, replaced or reused. The DHL Hong Kong Balloon is temporarily located in the area. The maximum floating height is 100m, forming an icon of the area. This LCA has no district or regional significance. |
Low |
LCA04 |
New Yau Ma Tei Typhoon Shelter Landscape The approximate size of this LCA is 9.07ha.
This is an area for typhoon shelter use in New Yau Ma Tei. It is
substantially enclosed by offshore breakwater. It is located at the northern part of the WKCD and the coastal edges
of Yau Ma Tei District. It is an inshore aquatic landscape formed by the
armourstone breakwaters constructed to protect large numbers of moored vessels,
such as freights, fishing vessels and sampans. They consist primarily of
water, which incorporate the jetties, pontoons and navigational features
resulting in a landscape that is a transitional one between the coastal land
and sea. It is a vibrant and active landscape characterised by a variety of
form and colour and often by a significant sense of enclosure. This
LCA has no district or regional significance. |
Low |
LCA05 |
The approximate size of this LCA is 7.59ha.
This side of the water is facing west of the |
High |
LCA06 |
The approximate size of this LCA is
48.7ha. The |
High |
LCA07 |
New Yau Ma Tei Container Terminal
Landscape The approximate size of this LCA is 1.19ha. This is a container terminal for container barges. The height of the container barges can be up to 30m which forms vertical elements towards the skyline. This LCA has no district or regional significance. |
Low |
LCA08 |
The approximate size of this LCA is 8.15ha.
This is one of the 3 cross harbour tunnel in |
Medium |
LCA09 |
Tsim Sha Tsui Late 20C / Early 21C
Commercial / Residential Complex Landscape The approximate size of this LCA is 18.38ha.
This area includes the Elements mall and the |
Medium |
LCA10 |
Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail
Link (XRL) Terminus Construction Site and Austin Station The approximate size of this LCA is 17.85ha.
The XRL is part of the strategic national express rail network that
connects |
Low |
LCA11 |
The approximate size of this LCA is 13.26ha.
This area is a major green area in the district large enough to form landscape
in its own right. The green area covers more than 13.3 ha. There are
approximately 1,500 trees with more than 90 tree species. There are a total
of 51 Old and Valuable Trees (OVT) of high amenity value located in |
High |
LCA12 |
The approximate size of this LCA is 20.97ha.
This is an area of mainly residential use. This comprises of a mix of
low to medium rise buildings. The streetscape is characterised with no or few
soft landscape treatments. The |
Medium |
LCA13 |
Tsim Sha Tsui Organic Mixed Urban
Development Landscape The approximate size of this LCA is 4.85ha. This is an area of mixed residential, commercial and retails land uses. This comprises mainly medium rise buildings of mixed retail / residential uses and high rise buildings for commercial / retail uses. Apart from the historical Ficus microcarpa along the Park Lane Shopper’s Boulevard, the streetscape is characterised with few soft landscape treatments. This LCA has a minor district and regional significance. |
Medium |
LCA14 |
Tsim Sha Tsui Commercial / Retail Complex
Landscape The approximate size of this LCA is 12.31ha. This is an area predominantly of commercial and retail land uses and comprises mainly high rise buildings. The streets are utilitarian with no or few soft landscape treatments. Landscape treatments are found in roof top gardens which combine with commercial or retail functions. This LCA has minor district and regional significance. |
Medium |
14.10.4.5 Baseline Visual Resources and Visually
Sensitive Receivers
Visual
Envelope
The baseline for the Visual Impact
Assessment is an understanding of the existing visual qualities within an area
that could be affected by the WKCD development. This area refers to the Visual
Envelope.
The Visual Envelope (i.e. Primary Zone of Visual
Influence) of the Project is illustrated in Figure 14.10.8. It is defined by
the area in proximity and is visually
affected by the Project. It includes the first row of street blocks/ buildings
facing towards the site, such as the office towers located to the southwest of
Canton Road along Gateway Boulevard, and the residential/and commercial
buildings located to the north and northeast of the site.
Given that only the above ground structures
associated with the Project (i.e. temporary ventilation shafts associated with
underpass road) will be seen, the visual assessment of the Project only focuses
on the compatibility of the associated above ground structures with the
surrounding areas.
Since the site is located in the eastern part
of the WKCD site, the Visual Envelope of the Project shares part of the Visual
Envelope of the WKCD development. A plan show
showing the Primary Zone of Visual Influence (PZVI), its zoning and the VSRs
located within the PZVI is provided in Figure 14.10.8.
Visual Resources
Natural
Ridgelines
The
ridgeline of Lion Rock located to
the north of West Kowloon provides a natural backdrop to the high-rise urban
areas of
Victoria
Harbour is a unique natural asset of Hong Kong, providing an open sea view to
the areas along the northern coast of Hong Kong Island and the southern coast
of Kowloon Peninsula. It is also a valuable visual resource and a visually
dominant natural feature to the WKCD, providing a magnificent sea view as the
backdrop. Hence, any changes to the
existing views to
Visually
Sensitive Receivers (VSRs)
23 VSRs located within the Visual Envelope (i.e. the Primary Zone of
Visual Influence) have been identified and shown in Figures 14.10.8. They are considered to be
visually most affected by the Project.
As the site is located within the WKCD site, the Project shares part of
the Visual Envelope of the proposed WKCD development. Therefore, most of the
selected VSRs of the Project are also the VSRs of the proposed WKCD development.
The selected VSRs are not limited to the existing VSRs located within
the Visual Envelope but also committed developments located immediately
adjacent to the site. There are 6 types of existing VSRs and 3 types of committed
VSRs identified within the Primary Zone of Visual Influence, which are listed
in Table 14.10.6.
The WKCD development will be implemented in
phases, and two WKCD facilities including Phase 1A of the Park and Phase 1 of
Xiqu Centre will be operational prior to the completion of the underpass road,
so they are considered as two committed VSRs of the Project. Whilst the completion
date for Phase 1A of the Park is in late December 2014, the completion date for
Xiqu Centre is in late December 2015. Please refer to Appendix 2.4 (Construction Zone) regarding
Phase A (Zone A) of the Park.
As completion date for basement associated with underpass road is in late
February 2016, Xiqu Centre will be completed 2 months before the completion of
the underpass road. It is anticipated that the underpass road will be close to
its construction completion in January and February 2016, therefore the future
VSRs at Xiqu Centre may not have direct view over the underpass road during
construction phase. It is also unlikely that performances will be staged at
Xiqu Centre immediately after its construction completion. Hence, the
assessment of visual impacts on Xiqu Centre during construction phase could not
be provided.
Brief descriptions of the VSRs and the existing views are
provided in Table 14.10.7. Photos of the existing VSRs within the Primary Zone of
Visual Influence are illustrated shown in Figure 14.10.9a to Figure 14.10.9e.
Baseline viewpoint illustrating the quality of existing views viewed by
selective VSR (i.e. VSR 14) is shown in Figure
14.10.13a.
Existing VSRs |
|
1. Residential
VSRs |
VSR 3 The Harbourside, VSR 4 The Arch, VSR 10 Wai Hang Building & VSR 11 |
2. Commercial
VSRs (e.g. offices and hotels) |
VSR 1 ICC, VSR 2 The Elements, VSR 12 & VSR 14 The Gateway Towers |
3.
Institutional VSRs |
VSR 16 Lai Chack Middle School, VSR & VSR 21 Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station |
4. Transportation VSRs |
VSR 7 |
5. Open Space/ Recreational VSR |
VSR 18 King George V Memorial Park, |
6. Transient VSRs |
VSR 9 Traveller Arriving VSR 19 Travellers along Austin
Road West & VSR 20 Travellers along |
Committed VSRs |
|
1.Commercial
VSR |
VSR 6 Planned CDA
development above West Kowloon Terminus |
2. Transportation
VSR |
VSR 5 |
3. Residential
VSR |
VSR 8 Planned residential development above Austin Station |
4. Recreational VSR |
VSR 22 Phase 1A of the Park |
5. Arts and Cultural VSR |
VSR
23 Phase 1 of
Xiqu Centre |
Table 14.10.7: Brief Descriptions of the VSRs and the Existing
Views
Key
VSRs |
Brief Descriptions of the VSRs and the existing views |
|
Commercial/
Residential/Transportation VSRs Located Immediately to the North of the WKCD
Site |
||
VSR 1 |
International Commerce Centre (ICC) |
¡
Standing above
Kowloon Station and the Elements shopping mall, ICC rises to 490 metres
above sea level and is the tallest building in ¡
Open and close view
of the site can be seen. ¡
Due to the
orientation of the building block, only the views from the southern and south eastern
facing offices would be affected. |
VSR 2 |
The Elements |
¡
At the base of the
ICC tower and 5 high rise residential developments (ie. the Harbourside, the
Arch, the Waterfront, Sorrento Towers and the Cullinan), the Elements
shopping mall comprises of 4 floors of retail shops, including ground, first,
second and roof floors (ie. podium level). ¡
Close view of the
site can be seen. ¡
On the ground floor
level, most of the areas are occupied by the transportation facilities,
including public transport interchange, concourse of Kowloon Station, Airport
Express in Town check in hall, coach terminus and parking etc. Most of these
areas are enclosed. Only an ice rink facing the intersection of Austin
Road West and Lin Cheung Road and particular
locations of the mall facing Austin Road West have a close view of the WKCD site. ¡
Due to the
orientation of the building block, only the views from the southern
facing areas of the mall and its podium would be affected. |
VSR 3 |
The Harbourside |
¡
Comprising of 3
residential towers, the Harbourside is one of the high rise residential
developments located to the north of the ¡
Views from the
lower floors of the buildings would be significantly
affected by the Project.
. ¡
Due to the
orientation of the building blocks, only the views from the southern facing
units would be affected. |
VSR 4 |
The Arch |
¡
Located close to
the junction of ¡
It is one of the
high rise residential developments located to the north of the ¡
Views from the lower
floors of the buildings would be significantly
affected by the project.
¡
Due to the
orientation of the building blocks, only the views from the southern facing
units would be affected. ¡
Cumulated visual
impacts derived by the Project, the proposed WKCD development, committed developments
at West Kowloon Terminus and Austin Station would be experienced by the
residents living at the Arch. |
VSR 5 |
|
¡
The West Kowloon
Terminus site is currently under construction. ¡
Travellers arriving at the
Terminus will have a close view of the site. |
VSR 6 |
Planned CDA Development above |
¡
The West Kowloon
Terminus site is currently under construction. ¡
Due to the
orientation of the building blocks, views from the southern facing units at
the lower floors would be blocked by the Project. |
VSR 7 |
Austin Station |
¡
There are two
station buildings for Austin Station, one is bounded by ¡
The southern
station building has partial view of the site, while the views to the WKCD site
from northern station building would be mostly blocked by the West Kowloon
Terminus and the southern station building. |
VSR 8 |
Planned Residential Development above Austin Station |
¡
The planned
residential development above Austin Station is currently under construction.
¡
Due to the
orientation of the building blocks, views from the southern and western
facing units at the lower floors to
|
VSR 9 * |
Traveller Arriving |
¡
Existing views to the western part
of the site and
|
VSR 10* |
|
¡
Residential
building located to the east of ¡
Partial view to the site can be viewed. ¡
Due to the
orientation of the building blocks, views from the western facing units would
be affected. ¡
Cumulated visual
impacts derived by the Project, the proposed WKCD development, committed developments
at West Kowloon Terminus and Austin Station would be experienced. |
VSR 11 |
|
¡
It is a high rise
residential development located to the east of ¡
Close and open view to the site can be seen. ¡
Due to the
orientation of the building blocks, views from the western facing units would
be affected. ¡
Cumulated visual
impacts derived by the Project, the proposed WKCD development, committed developments
at West Kowloon Terminus and Austin Station would be experienced. |
Commercial VSRs
Located to the Southeast of the WKCD Site |
||
VSR 12 |
|
¡
Open view of the
site can be seen in a short distance. ¡
Due to the
orientation of the building block,
only western and northern facing units would
be affected. |
VSR 13 |
Royal Pacific Hotel and Towers |
¡
Due to the
orientation of the building block,
only some of the northern facing units at upper levels and western facing
units would be affected. ¡
Part
of the views to the site are
blocked by |
VSR 14 |
The |
¡
Gateway Hong Kong
is part of ¡
Open view of the
site can be seen in a short distance at upper levels. ¡
Due to the
orientation of the building blocks,
only western and northern facing units would
be affected |
VSR 15 |
Hong Kong |
¡
Open view of the
site can be seen in a short distance. ¡
Due to the
orientation of the building block,
northern facing units would be affected |
Institutional
VSRs Located to the East of |
||
VSR 16 |
|
¡
Located opposite
Tsim Sha Tsui fire station, view to the site from ¡
Due to the
orientation of the building block,
only western facing units would be affected. |
VSR 17 |
|
¡
Located opposite
the ¡
However, part of
the site could be viewed if the fire station was relocated. ¡
Due to the
orientation of the building block,
only western facing units would be affected. |
Open
Space/Recreational VSR |
||
VSR 18 |
|
n
Located immediately
to the east of Austin Station, views to the site at ground level are largely
blocked by Austin Station. n
Visitors would
mostly experience the visual impacts derived by the committed developments at
Austin Station. |
Transient VSRs |
|
|
VSR 19 |
Travellers along |
¡
Varying views
depending on locations along ¡
Close and open view
to the site can be seen. ¡
Travellers
travelling along the road section between |
VSR 20 |
Travellers along |
¡
Varying views
depending on locations along ¡
Travellers along
the section of |
VSR Located
within the WKCD Site (Will be Relocated in Operation Phase) |
||
VSR 21 |
Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station |
¡
Located within the
WKCD site, Tsim Sha Tsui fire station has close and open view of the eastern part
of the site. ¡
During construction
phase,
eastern facing units would experience cumulative impacts derived by the Project, the proposed
WKCD development and committed development at West Kowloon Terminus, while
northern facing unit would experience cumulative impacts derived by the project, the proposed
WKCD development, and committed developments at West Kowloon Terminus and
Austin Station. |
VSR 22 |
Phase
1A of the Park |
¡
Except
the southern part of the waterfront promenade, the site
of Phase 1A of the Park
currently has been left vacant, ¡
The
MTR ventilation building is located within the site of Phase 1A of the Park. ¡
It
is located in the southern part of the headland of the Park and the visitors
to Phase 1A of the Park are hardly able to see the site. |
VSR 23 |
Phase
1 of Xiqu Centre |
¡
The
site of the Xiqu Centre is located adjacent to the intersection of ¡
It
is located to the east of the access point of the underpass road at ¡
Due
to the delayed relocation of the Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station, the access point
at ¡
XIqu
Centre will be completed 2 months before the completion of the underpass
road. |
Sensitivity
of VSRs
The sensitivity of the VSRs depends on the location of VSRs, the distance from the site, the degree of visibility, and the type of VSR which determines the duration and frequency of views.
The
sensitivity of residential VSRs nearby is considered to be high, since they
will have direct and frequent views towards the site. The sensitivity of commercial
and institutional VSRs is generally considered
to be medium, as their views to the site are shorter in duration and less in
frequency. Open space VSRs
generally have low sensitivity because of medium duration and occasional
frequency of their stay. Travellers travelling on the roads in the
periphery of the WKCD such as
The baseline assessment of the existing VSRs and the planned VSRs within the Visual Envelope is shown in Table 14.10.8.
Table
14.10.8: Sensitivity
of the VSRs
Type of VSRs |
VSRs |
Name
of VSRs |
Viewing
Distance (m) (approx.) |
Estimated
Number of Individuals/ Receiver
Population (Many /Medium /Few) |
Type
of VSRs |
Quality of Existing View |
Availability
of Alternative Views |
Degree
of Visibility |
Duration
(Long/ Medium/ Short) and Frequency of View (Frequent/ Occasional/Rare) |
Sensitivity (Low/ Medium/ High) |
CDA |
VSR 1 |
International Commerce Centre (ICC) |
90m |
Many |
View from commercial
development (ie. offices and hotel) (workers/ hotel
guests) |
Good |
Medium availability |
Open view |
Long/ Occasional |
Medium to High |
CDA |
VSR 2 |
The Elements |
65m |
Many |
View from commercial
development (ie. shopping mall) (workers/ visitors) |
Good |
Limited
availability |
Open view |
Short/Occasional |
Medium to High |
CDA |
VSR 3 |
The
Harbourside |
80m |
Many |
View from residential
development (Residents) |
Good |
Limited
availability |
Open view |
Long/ Frequent |
High |
CDA |
VSR 4 |
The Arch |
95m |
Many |
View from residential
development (Residents) |
Good |
Limited
availability |
Open view |
Long/ Frequent |
High |
CDA |
VSR 5 |
|
30m |
Many |
View from transportation
facility (Travellers) |
Medium |
Medium availability |
Partial view |
Short/Occasional |
Medium |
CDA |
VSR 6 |
Planned CDA Development above |
30m |
Many |
View from commercial
development (ie. offices) (workers) |
Good |
Limited
availability |
Partial view |
Long/ Occasional |
Medium |
T |
VSR 7 |
Austin Station |
75m |
Many |
View from transportation facility (Workers and travellers arriving Austin Station) |
Medium |
Medium availability |
Partial view |
Short/Occasional |
Medium |
R |
VSR 8 |
Planned Residential Development above Austin Station |
75m |
Many |
View from residential development (Residents) |
Good |
Limited
availability |
Partial view |
Long/ Frequent |
High |
T |
VSR 9 |
Travellers arriving |
140m |
Many |
Travellers arriving the |
Good |
Limited
availability |
Partial/ No view |
Short/Frequent |
Low |
R |
VSR 10 |
|
80m |
Many |
View from residential
development (Residents) |
Medium |
Medium availability |
Partial view |
Long/ Frequent |
Medium to High |
R |
VSR 11 |
The |
40m |
Many |
View from residential
development (Residents) |
Good |
Limited availability |
Open view |
Long/ Frequent |
High |
C |
VSR 12 |
|
40m |
Many |
View from commercial
development (ie.shopping mall and transportation facility) (Visitors and Workers) |
Good |
Medium availability |
Open view |
Long (Staff)/ Short (Visitors) Occasional |
Medium to High |
C |
VSR 13 |
Royal Pacific Hotel and Towers |
130m |
Many |
View from commercial
development (ie. hotel) (Workers/ Hotel Guests) |
Medium |
Medium availability |
Partial view |
Long/Occasional |
Medium to High |
C |
VSR 14 |
Gateway |
250m |
Many |
View from commercial
development (ie. offices) (Workers) |
Good |
Medium availability |
Partial view |
Long (Staff)/ Short (Visitors) Occasional |
Medium to High |
OU |
VSR 15 |
Hong Kong |
220m |
Many |
View from transportation
facility (Workers/ Visitors) |
Good |
Medium availability |
Open view |
Long (Staff)/ Short (Visitors) Frequent |
Medium |
GIC |
VSR 16 |
|
35m |
Medium |
View from GIC facility (Students and Workers) |
Fair |
Good availability |
No view (before Tsim Sha Tsui fire station is relocated) |
Medium/ Occasional |
Low |
GIC |
VSR 17 |
|
35m |
Medium |
View from GIC facility (Students and Workers) |
Fair |
Good availability |
No view (before Tsim Sha Tsui fire station is relocated) |
Medium /Occasional |
Low |
O |
VSR 18 |
|
155m |
Medium |
View from open space (Visitors and Pedestrians) |
Fair |
Good availability |
Partial view |
Medium /Occasional |
Low |
T |
VSR 19 |
Travellers along |
Varies |
Medium |
View from transient VSRs (Passengers/ Pedestrians and other Road Users) |
Medium |
Medium availability |
Glimpse view |
Short/Occasional |
Low |
T |
VSR 20 |
Travellers along |
Varies |
Many |
View from Transient VSRs (Passengers/ Pedestrians and
other Road Users) |
Fair |
Good availability |
Glimpse view |
Short/Occasional |
Low |
OU |
VSR 21 |
Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station |
N/A |
Medium |
View from GIC facility (Workers) |
Good |
Limited
availability |
Open view |
Medium/ Occasional |
Medium |
O |
VSR 22 |
Phase
1A of the Park |
325m |
Medium |
View from open space (Visitors and Pedestrians) |
Fair |
Good Availability |
Partial view |
Medium /Occasional |
Low |
OU |
VSR 23 |
Phase
1 of Xiqu Centre |
75m |
Medium |
View from arts and cultural facility (Visitors and Workers) |
Fair |
Good Availability (view to the intersection of Road West Limited availability (view to the |
Partial View Open view |
Medium /Occasional |
Low to Medium |
Notes: Type of VSRs - R: residential, C: commercial; CDA: Comprehensive Development Area; GIC: Government, Institution or Community; O: open space; OU; other specified uses; T: transient.
14.10.5 Evaluation and Assessment of Landscape and Visual Impacts
14.10.5.1 Landscape Impact Assessment
Source of
Landscape Impacts
Landscape impacts arise due to the
construction of the proposed underpass road. During construction
phase, removal and disturbance of existing trees, excavation works, disposition
of the excavated materials and the associated construction activities with the
underpass road are the main sources of the impact, while the operation of the
proposed underpass road is the main concerns during operation phase.
Potential sources of impacts on LRs and LCAs during construction and operation phase are summarized in
Table 14.10.9:
Table 14.10.9: Source of impacts during construction and operation phase
Landscape Impacts |
|
Construction
Phase (Direct Impacts) |
|
LC1-1 |
Construction of the underpass road and associated
works |
LC1-2 |
Removal and
disturbance of existing trees |
LC1-3 |
Relocation of
Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station |
Construction
Phase (Indirect Impacts) |
|
LC1-4 |
Construction traffic |
LC1-5 |
The laying
down of utilities, including water, drainage and power, |
LC1-6 |
Temporary
site access, site cabins, material storage and heavy machinery, |
Operation Phase
Impacts |
|
LO1-1 |
Operation of the new underpass road |
Magnitude of
Change of LRs and LCAs
The magnitude of change, before implementation of mitigation measures, on landscape resources and landscape character areas that would occur in the construction and operation phase are summarized in Table 14.10.10 and Table 14.10.11 respectively.
Note that only the landscape resources (Open
Space: LR1.7; Amenity Planting: LR2.9 and LR2.36) and landscape characters area
(LCA01 to LCA03, LCA10 and LCA14) which are affected by proposed underpass road
will be assessed with magnitude of changes. Some landscape resources (Open
Space: LR1.1, LR1.4 to LR1.6, LR1.8 and LR1.15; Amenity Planting: LR2.1 to LR2.3,
LR2.5 to LR2.8, LR2.10 to LR2.11, LR2.13 to LR2.17, LR2.27 to LR2.35; LR2.37
and LR2.38; Water Body: LR3.1; Human Landscape Resources – Cultural Heritage
and Historical Features: LR4.1 to LR4.4) and landscape character area (LCA04 to
LCA13), which are not affected by proposed underpass road, are omitted in the
assessment since they are insubstantially impacted and have no source of
impact.
Table 14.10.10: Impacts on landscape resources during construction and operation phase
LR No. |
Landscape
Resources |
Compatibil-ity
of the project with the surrounding landscape (Low/ Medium/ High) |
Reversibil-ity (Low/ Medium/ High) |
Scale of Develop-ment (Small / Medium / Large) |
Source of
Impact |
Description
of Impacts |
Duration
of Impact under construction and operation phases (Short/ Long) |
Magnitude
of change (Negligible, Small, Intermediate, Large) |
||
Construct-ion
Phase |
Operation
Phase |
Construct-ion
Phase |
Operation
Phase |
|||||||
LR1:
Open Space |
||||||||||
LR1.7 |
Temporary
open space along the waterfront promenade within the site boundary |
Medium |
Medium |
Small |
LC1-1,
LC1-2, LC1-4 to, LC1-6 |
LO1-1 |
Due to the construction works, excavation works and
interim works of the underpass road, there will be loss of approximately 0.03ha
temporary open space to the public in the construction stage. Affected area consists of parts of the road
and cycling track with associated street planting leading towards the
temporary waterfront promenade. In the
operation phase, affected area of the landscape resource will be reinstated
as part of the Park with the provision of open space for public enjoyment
above ground and become part of the underpass road underneath. |
Short
|
Small
|
Small
|
LR2: Amenity
Planting |
||||||||||
LR2.9 |
Roadside
|
Medium |
Medium |
Medium |
LC1-1
to LC1-6 |
LO1-1 |
There
are 15 roadside trees will be affected due to the construction of underpass
road before 2025 for the relocation of Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station. 12 trees,
with poor form/ health or weed species, are proposed to be felled while 3
trees are proposed to be transplanted. Also, all trees may be affected by the
construction of other WKCD facilities before the LC1-3, tree preservation
works for all these trees (15 nos) will be carried out. In the operation
phase, this LR will become one of the main entrance and pedestrian walkway to
the WKCD and become one of the entrance of underpass
road underneath. |
Long |
Intermed-iate |
Intermed-iate |
LR2.36* |
Tree
Cluster in the Eastern Part within the Boundary Area |
Low |
Low |
Medium |
LC1-1,
LC1-2, LC1-4 to, LC1-6 |
LO1-1 |
Although
there are 372 trees in this LR, only 30 trees with grassland (~0.08 ha) will
be affected. 30 trees will be felled and grassland (~0.8ha) will be removed from
the site. Other 342 trees in this LR with no direct conflict with
construction of underpass road will be retained in situ. All felled trees are
ubiquitous species and can be easily replaceable by new planting with better
quality or weed species. During operation phase, this LR will become part of
the Park and Avenue and become part of the underpass road underneath. |
Long |
Intermediate |
Intermediate |
*Note
that some trees located in LR2.36 are currently being relocated to areas around
LR2.31 by LCSD, hence the actual tree numbers are subject to futher changes.
Table 14.10.11: Impacts on
landscape character areas during construction and operation phase
LCA.
No. |
Landscape Resources |
Compatibil-ity of the project with the surrounding landscape
(Low/ Medium/High) |
Reversibil-ity (Low/ Medium/High) |
Scale of Develop-ment (Small / Medium/Large) |
Source of Impact |
Description of Impacts |
Duration of Impact under construction and operation phases
(Short/Long) |
Magnitude of change (Negligible, Small, Intermediate, Large) |
||
Construct-ion Phase |
Operation Phase |
Construct-ion Phase |
Operation Phase |
|||||||
LCA01 |
|
Medium |
Medium |
Medium |
LC1-1,
LC-1-2, LR1-4 to LC1-6 |
LO1-1, |
Approximately
0.39ha of this LCA will be affected by the construction works, excavation
works and interim works for the underpass road, which will result in existing
trees to be felled and incompatibility to LCA. There are total 100 trees (in
LR2.36) in this LCA, of which 10 trees with grassland (~0.03ha) affected by
the construction of underpass road will be felled, other 90 trees with no
direct conflicts with the construction of underpass road will be retained in
situe. |
Long |
Intermed-iate
|
Intermed-iate
|
LCA02 |
|
Medium |
Medium |
Large |
LC1-1,
LC-1-2, LR1-4 to LC1-6 |
NA |
Approximately
3.65ha of this LCA will be affected by the construction works, excavation
works and interim works for the underpass road will result in existing tree
to be felled and incompatibility to the LCA. There are total 272 trees (in
LR2.36) in this LCA, of which 20 trees with grassland (~0.05ha) will be
felled and 252 trees with no direct conflicts with the construction of
underpass road will be retained in situ. |
Long |
Intermed-iate |
Intermediate |
LCA03 |
|
Medium |
Medium |
Small |
LC1-1
to LC1-2, LR1-4 to LC1-6 |
NA |
Approximately
0.03ha of this LCA will be affected by the construction works, excavation
works and interim works for the underpass road will result in loss of small
portion of (~0.03ha) temporary open space in LR 1.7 to the public in the
construction stage and incompatibility to the LCA. |
Short |
Small |
Small
|
LCA10 |
Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong
Kong Express Rail Link (XRL) Terminus Construction Site and Austin Station |
Medium |
Medium |
Small |
LC1-1,
LR1-4 to LC1-6 |
LO1-1, |
Approximately
0.06ha of this LCA will be affected by the construction works, excavation
works and interim works for the underpass road will result incompatibility to
the LCA. |
Small |
Small |
Small |
LCA14 |
Tsim
Sha Tsui Commercial/ Retail Complex Landscape |
Medium |
Medium |
Medium |
LC1-1
to LR1-6 |
LO1-1 |
Approximately
0.24 ha of this LCA will be affected by the construction works, excavation
works and interim works for the underpass road will result existing trees to
be felled (12 nos.) and to be transplated (3 nos.) in LR2.9 (total 15 trees) and
incompatibility to the LCA. Also, all trees may be affected by the
construction of other WKCD facilities before LC1-3,
tree preservation works for all trees will be carried out. |
Long |
Intermed-iate |
Intermed-iate |
Landscape Impacts to LRs during Construction and Operation Phase (Before Mitigaiton)
The significance of landscape impact is a function of the sensitivity of the affected landscape receptors and the magnitude of change that they will experience. The major landscape impact that will arise from the proposed development is the existing trees would be felled within WKCD site boundary during construction phase.
In summary, it is anticipated that affected
Landscape Resources during construction and operation phase are LR1.7, LR2.9, LR2.36. Those LRs with insubstantial impact are not
elaborated in details.
The significant of
landscape impacts, before implementation of mitigation measures, to Landscape
Resources, in the construction and operation phase are assessed and presented
in Table 14.10.19. The significance of
unmitigated impacts on landscape resources would vary from slight adverse
to moderate adverse.
Impact on LR1 Open Space
LR 1.7 – Temporary open space along the
waterfront promenade within the site boundary
It is a temporary
open space with medium sensitivity.
During construction phase, excavation works and interim works of the underpass
road will result the temporary loss of public open space (~0.03ha). Affected
area consists of parts of the road and cycling track with associated street
planting leading towards the temporary waterfront promenade. However, as the affected area is relatively small (~0.03ha), which
magnitude of change due to construction of underpass road is considered as small
and the resultant unmitigated impact during construction and operation phase is
slight adverse.
Impact
on LR2 Amenity Planting
LR2.9 – Roadside
15 roadside trees
are the key resources of this LR. Trees found are common species with medium
amenity value and fair condition. The sensitivity of this LR is medium.
During construction phase, excavation works and interim works of the underpass
road will result the which 12 trees will be felled, including 1 large tree Ficus microcarpa, and 3 trees will be transplanted before 2025 for
the relocation of Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station. Tree species to be affected
include Acacia confusa, Aleruites moluccana, Ficus elastica, Ficus microcarpa, Macaranga
tanarius, Litsea glutinosa, Clausema lansium and Morus alba.
Magnitude of change due to the construction of underpass road is considered as intermediate
and the resultant unmitigated impact during construction and operation phase is
moderate adverse.
LR2.36 – Tree Cluster in the Eastern Part
within the Boundary Area
Tree cluster (372 nos.), with medium amenity
value and poor to fair condition, and grassland are found scattered in the
eastern part within the boundary area. Their sensitivity is considered as medium. Although there are 372 trees in this LR,
only 30 trees with grassland
(~0.08 ha) will be affected. These 30 trees will be felled and grassland
(~0.08ha) will be removed from site. Other 342 trees in this LR, with no direct
conflict with construction of underpass road, will be retained in situ. All
felled trees are ubiquitous
species and can be easily replaceable by new planting with better quality or
weed species, magnitude of change is considered as intermediate and the
resultant unmitigated impact during construction and operation phase is moderate
adverse.
Impact on Existing Tree
For LRs, approximately 387 trees (15 trees
in LR2.9 and 372 trees in LR2.36) will be affected within the site boundary due
to the construction of underpass road, of which 42 trees (12 trees in LR2.9 and
30 trees in LR2.36) with self-seed species and/or poor health and tree form are
proposed to be felled, 3 trees (in LR2.9) with fair health condition and tree
form and medium amenity value, are proposed to be transplanted within the site and
342 trees (in LR2.36), with no direct conflicts with the construction of
underpass road, are proposed to be retain in situ.
Affected tree
species include Acacia auriculiformis,
Acacia confusa, Aleurities moluccana, Casuarina equisetifolia, Celtis sinensis,
Clausena lansium, Ficus microcarpa, Ficus elastica, Ficus virens, Hibiscus
tiliaceus, Leucaena leucocephala, Litsea glutinosa, Macaranga tanarius, Melia
azedarach and Morus alba. The majority of tree species affected is
self-seeded weed Leucaena leucocephala.
The condition of the tree range from poor to fair. Amenity value range from low to medium.
Landscape Impacts to LCAs during Construction and Operation Phase
(Before Mitigation)
In
summary, it is anticipated that affected Landscape Character Area (~4.37ha)
during construction and operation phase of the underpass road are LCA01 to
LCA03, LCA10 and LCA14. The major landscape impacts to the affected LCAs(LCA-1 to LCA03, LCA10 and LCA14) are the existing trees
would be felled and the incompatibility of construction works of underpass road
to the LCAs.
The significant of landscape impact, before
implementation of mitigation measures, to Landscape Character Area, in the
construction and operation phases are assessed and presented in Table 14.10.20.
The significant of unmitigated impacts on landscape character area would value
from slight adverse to moderate adverse.
LCA01
This LCA is still
a vacant land reserved for WKCD development, which has no direct or regional
significance. The sensitivity of this LCA is low during construction and operation phase of the underpass road. Approximately 0.39ha of this LCA will be
affected by the construction works, excavation works and interim works for the
underpass road, which will result in existing trees will be felled and
incompatibility to the LCA. There are total 100 trees (in LR2.36) in this LCA,
of which 10 trees with
grassland (~0.03ha) will be felled and 90 trees with no direct conflicts with the
construction of underpass road will be retained in situ. Magnitude of
change to this LCA is considered as intermediate and the resultant
unmitigated impact during construction and operation phase is moderate
adverse.
LCA02
This area is
currently under site formation and underground struction works, which has no
district or regional significance. The sensitivity of the LCA is low. 3.65 ha of this LCA will be
affected by the construction of underpass road, which will result to the
existing trees will be felled and incompatibility to the LCA. There are total
272 trees (in LR2.36) in this LCA, of which 20 trees will be felled with grassland (~0.05ha) and 252 trees with
no direct conflicts with the construction of underpass road will be retained in
situ. The magnitude of change to this LCA is considered as intermediate
and the resultant unmitigated impact during construction and operation phase is
moderate adverse.
LCA03
This area is currently
a temporary open space opened to the public and allow activities along the
waterfront, as this LCA is temporary, which has no district or regional
significance, the sensitivity of the LCA is considered as low. Approximately
0.03ha of this LCA will be affected by the construction works, excavation works
and interim works for the underpass road will result in loss of small portion
of (~0.03ha) temporary open space in LR 1.7 to the public in the construction
stage and incompatibility to the LCA.. As the extent of the affected area by the construction of underpass
road is relatively small, magnitude of change to this LCA is considered as small
and the resultant unmitigated impact during construction and operation
phase is slight adverse.
LCA10
Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL) Terminus Construction Site
and Austin Station
This LCA is an
important public transport interchange and will provide a large extent of
public green space linking to the WKCD. This LCA is currently under
construction of the XRL terminus, which has no distict or regional
significance, the sensitivity is considered as low. Approximately 0.06ha of this LCA will be
affected by the construction works, excavation works and interim works for the
underpass road will result incompatibility to the LCA.. As the extent of
the affected area by the construction of underpass road is relatively small,
magnitude of change to this LCA is considered as small and the resultant
unmitigated impact during construction and operation phase is slight adverse.
LCA14 Tsim Sha
Tsui Commercial/ Retail Complex Landscape
This LCA is
predominantly of commercial and retail land uses and comprises mainly high rise
buildings, which minor district and regional significance, the sensitivity of
this LCA is medium. Approximately 0.24 ha of this LCA will be
affected by the construction works, excavation works and interim works for the
underpass road will result existing tree to be felled (12 nos.) and to be
transplanted (3 nos.) in LR2.9 (total 15) and incompatibility to the LCA. Also, all
trees may be affected by the construction of other WKCD facilities before LC1-3, tree preservation works for all trees will be carried
out. Magnitude of change to this LCA is considered
as intermediate. The unmitigated
landscape impact to this LCA is moderate adverse.
14.10.5.2 Visual Impact Assessment
The
assessment of the significance of visual impacts is based on a combination of
factors, including the sensitivity of the VSRs, their magnitude of change and
whether impacts are beneficial or adverse, short term or long term, reversible or irreversible and direct or
indirect. The future outlook of
the area, visual compatibility of the associated structures of the underpass road project with the
surroundings, and its obstruction and interference with key views of the VSRs
are important considerations for the
visual impact assessment.
Sources of Visual
Impacts during Construction Phase
Major
impacts including degrading of visual quality of existing views, and visual
incompatibility of the works and the associated above ground external
structures with the surrounding visual context, will be resulted from the
following activities during construction phase (shown in Table 14.10.12). In addition to the construction activities mentioned above, night time
lighting provided for the construction activities could be one of the sources
of visual impacts during construction phase. However, the visual impacts
derived by these sources are mostly temporary.
Table 14.10.12: Sources
of Visual Impacts during Construction Phase
Sources of Direct Visual Impacts |
|
DVIC1 |
Construction of underground roads and associated various above-ground external structures such as ventilation shafts |
DVIC2 |
Night time lighting for the construction activities. |
Sources of Indirect Visual Impacts |
|
IVIC1 |
Construction traffic |
IVIC2 |
Various construction activities including operation of PME, excavations and road diversions etc. |
IVIC3 |
Site cabins and heavy machinery |
IVIC4 |
Dust during dry weather |
Sources of Visual
Impacts during Operation Phase
The
impacts during operation phase depend on visual compatibility of the associated
structures to the surrounding landscape due to the operation of
underpass roads serving the proposed WKCD development.
As the temporary
ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road will still be present
upon the completion of the underpass road, these structures will be the major
source of visual impacts during operation phase (day 1).
However, during operation phase (year 10), these ventilation shafts will be integrated with the WKCD development and it will not be visible as individual structures. The WKCD buildings will be well designed to visually hide the ventilation shafts. Accordingly, the operation of roads and traffic generated is the major source of the visual impacts during operation phase (year 10).
In addition to
erection of ventilation buildings and structures, operation of roads and
traffic generated, night time lighting provided for illumination of the
underpass roads and its structures could be one of the sources of visual
impacts during operation phase. Sources of the visual impacts during
operation phase are listed in Table 14.10.13.
Table 14.10.13: Sources
of Visual Impacts during Operation Phase (Day 1 and Year 10)
Sources of Direct Visual Impacts |
|
DVIO1 |
Erection of temporary standalone ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road during operation phase (Day 1) |
DVIO2 |
Operation of roads during operation phase (day 1 & year 10) |
DVIO3 |
Night time lighting for illumination of the underpass roads and its structures (during operation phase (day 1 & yar 10) |
Sources of Indirect Visual Impacts |
|
IVIO1 |
Traffic generated during operation phase (day 1 & year 10) |
Magnitude of
Change of the VSRs
The factors determining the magnitude of impacts include scale of development, compatibility of the project with the surrounding landscape, reversibility of change, viewing distance, potential blocking of view, duration of impacts under construction and operation phases. The magnitude of impact/change, before the implementation of mitigation measures, on the VSRs during construction and operation phases are shown in Table 14.10.14.
Given that the duration of impacts is relatively short during construction phase, the magnitude of change of the VSRs mainly depends on the viewing distance and potential blocking of view by the Project. Since there will be a number of construction activities within the WKCD site during construction phase, the construction activities of the Project will appear part of the construction activities of the WKCD. The magnitude of change of many of the VSRs such as the residential developments located to the north and the west of the site is considered to be moderate during construction phase.
The magnitude of change of all VSRs ranges from negligible to small during operation phase.
During operation phase (day 1), temporary ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road will be the major source of visual impact. However, these structures will be only present temporarily. Due to the short duration of impacts, small structures, high reversibility of change and low potential blocksage of the view, it is considered that the magnitude of change of the VSRs range from negligible to small during operation phase.
During operation phase (year 10), the ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road will be integrated with the entire development and form part of the physical buildings of the WKCD development. The WKCD buildings will be well designed to visually hide the ventilation shafts and they will no longer be visible as individual structures. In addition to the hidden location of these ventilation shafts, well designed louvre system / ventilated facade will be used for screening these ventilation shafts. Accordingly, the magnitude of change of the VSRs is generally small or even negligible. The location and sections of notional louvres within the buildings at the WKCD is shown in Figures 14.10.12.
Since
views to the site from VSR 16
Lai Chack Middle School and VSR 17 Canton Road Government Primary School are largely blocked by Tsim Sha Tsui fire
station before it is removed, the magnitude of change of VSR 16 and VSR 17 is
negligible during construction phase. After the removal of Tsim Sha Tsui fire
station, it is considered that magnitude of change of VSR 16 and VSR 17 during
operation phase is small, due to the project is highly compatible with
surrounding landscape
Table 14.10.14: Magnitude
of Change of the VSRs
VSRs |
|
Viewing distance (m) approx. |
Potential blocking
of view (Full/Partial/ Slight/None) |
Reversibility (Yes/No) |
Compatibility of the
proposed project with the surrounding landscape During construction/ operation
phases (High/Medium/Low) |
Scale of the
proposed
development (large/small) |
Duration of impacts
during construction/ operation
phases |
Magnitude of change |
|
During construction
phase |
During operation
phase |
||||||||
VSR 1 |
International Commerce Centre (ICC) |
90m |
Slight |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Moderate |
Small |
VSR 2 |
The Elements |
65m |
Partial to Full |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Moderate to Large |
Small |
VSR 3 |
The Harbourside |
80m |
Slight |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Moderate |
Small |
VSR 4 |
The Arch |
95m |
Slight |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Moderate |
Small |
VSR 5 |
|
30m |
Partial |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Moderate |
Small |
VSR 6 |
Planned CDA Development above |
30m |
Slight |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Moderate |
Small |
VSR 7 |
Austin Station |
75m |
Partial |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Moderate |
Small |
VSR 8 |
Planned Residential Development above Austin Station |
75m |
Slight |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Moderate |
Small |
VSR 9 |
Travellers arriving Western Harbour Crossing |
140m |
None |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Negligible |
Negligible |
VSR 10 |
|
80m |
Partial |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Moderate |
Small |
VSR 11 |
The |
40m |
Partial |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Moderate |
Small |
VSR 12 |
|
40m |
Slight |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Small |
Negligible |
VSR 13 |
Gateway |
250m |
Slight |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Small |
Negligible |
VSR 14 |
Ocean Centre |
645m |
Slight |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Small |
Negligible |
VSR 15 |
Hong Kong Terminal |
220m |
Slight |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Small |
Negligible |
VSR 16 |
|
135m |
None |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Negligible |
Small |
VSR 17 |
Primary School |
135m |
None |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Negligible |
Small |
VSR 18 |
|
155m |
None |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Negligible |
Negligible |
VSR 19 |
Travellers along Austin Road West |
Varies |
Partial |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Moderate |
Small |
VSR 20 |
Travellers along Canton Road |
Varies |
Partial |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Moderate |
Small |
VSR 21 |
Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station |
N/A |
Partial to Full |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ N/A |
Moderate to Large |
N/A |
VSR 22SR 22 |
Phase
1A of the Park |
325m |
None |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
Negligible |
Negligible |
VSR 23SR 23 |
Phase
1 of Xiqu Centre |
75m |
Partial
to Full |
Yes |
Medium/ High |
Small |
Short/ Permanent |
N/A* |
Small |
*Notes: As completion date for basement associated with underpass road is in late February 2016, Xiqu Centre will be completed 2 months before the completion of the underpass road. It is anticipated that the future VSRs at Xiqu Centre may not have direct viewover the underpass road during construction phase. Hence, the assessment of visual impacts on Xiqu Centre during construction phase could not be provided.
Prediction and Evaluation of Visual Impacts
Visual Impacts
during Construction Phase (Before Mitigation)
During construction phase, the unmitigated visual impacts are adverse in nature and mainly include visual incompatibility of the construction works with the surroundings and degrading of visual quality of existing views.
During construction phase, the visual impacts will be generally derived by some construction activities and the above ground external ancillary structures (e.g. ventilation shafts) within the site. There will be 22 ventilation shafts for the basement associated with the underpass road located within the site, and their height is ranged from 7 to 15m, which are about 2 to 4 storeys high. Section of the stand alone ventilation shafts for the underpass road and other completed buildings located within the WKCD site during transition period is provided in Figure 14.10.11, showing the number and the location of the ventilation shafts that will be seen from the south of the site during construction phase.
Comparing to the scale of the proposed WKCD development, the scale of the Project is small. The construction activities of the Project mainly would pose visual impact on the VSRs at ground and lower levels. Since the sensitivity of the residential developments located to the north and the east of the site is high, the visual impacts posed on these residential VSRs are generally moderate to high before mitigation. However, the visual impacts posed on the commercial developments located to the southeast of the site are generally slight to moderate due to its medium sensitivity.
Visual Impacts during
Operation Phase (Before Mitigation)
As the underpass road will be completed before most of the other future developments within the WKCD are completed, the 22 ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road will be still present during operation phase (day 1). Major unmitigated visual impacts during operation phase (day 1) are visual incompatibility of these temporary ventilation shafts with the surroundings. However, it is temporary. Since the scale of the Project is localised, VSRs to be affected will be confined to those in the surroundings of the Project and the visual impacts derived by these ventilation shafts are generally slight.
During operation phase (year 10), the ventilation shafts will be integrated with the entire WKCD development and form part of the physical buildings of the WKCD development. The CACF buildings will be well designed to visually hide the ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road and they will no longer be visible as individual structures. In addition to the hidden location of these ventilation shafts, well designed louvre system / ventilated facade will be used for screening the ventilation shafts. The notional louvre locations and the sections of the WKT and WKCD louvres within the building are provided in Figure 14.10.12.
As the Project mostly consisted of underground structures and all of the ventilation shafts will no longer be visible as individual structures during operation phase (year 10), the potential visual impacts derived by the Project on most of the VSRs are considered to be slight.
However, some VSRs abutting the entrance of the underground roads such as VSR 2 (The Elements) and VSR 7 (Austin Station) will have slight to moderate visual impacts during operation phase (both day 1 and year 10).
The visual impacts identified for each VSR
are shown at Table 14.10.15 and
14.10.16.
The
mitigation measures proposed to lessen the visual impacts derived by the
sources mentioned above during construction phase and operation phase (day 1
and year 10) are described in Section
14.10.6.
Night Time Visual Impacts
due to the Project
In addition to the sources of the visual
impacts mentioned above, night time lighting is also one of the sources of the
visual impacts.
Major considerations for the night time
visual impacts are the scope of the Project, the light sources in the
surrounding areas of the site, distance between the VSRs and the site,
sensitivity of the VSRs and the blockage of light by any buildings and
structures.
As the underpass road is located
mainly on the WKCD Basement Level 1 (between 0.6mPD and 1.65 mPD), except at
the vehicular access points where the underpass road connects to existing
ground level roads adjacent to the WKCD site, it is
considered that the night time visual impacts arising from the Project during
construction and operation phases are
insignificant to the VSRs located to the south and to the west of the WKCD
Site.
Due to the existing night time
illumination already prevalent in the
The visual impacts derived from night time light could be reduced by mitigation measures such as avoidance of lighting from spilling onto nearby residential developments, and this will be discussed in Section 14.10.6.3.
Table 14.10.15: Significance Threshold of Visual Impact
Before and After Mitigation Measures (Construction Phase)
VSRs |
Name of
VSRs |
Location
of VSRs |
Type &
Approximate Number of VSRs |
Description
of Existing View & Degree of Visibility of DP |
Receiver’s
Sensitivity |
Source of
Impact |
Minimum
Viewing Distance of VSRs |
Magnitude
of Change |
Significance
Threshold of Potential Visual Impact (Before Mitigation) |
Mitigation Measures |
Significance
Threshold of Residual Impact (Upon Mitigation) |
|
|
|
Construction
Phase |
||||||||
VSR 1 |
International Commerce Centre (ICC) |
Located
immediately to the north of the site |
¡ Commercial ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the dense vegetation at
the entrance of the WHC and the construction site of the WKCD. ¡ Open and close view of the site can be seen. |
Medium to High |
DVIC1, DVIC2, IVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3 |
90m |
Moderate |
Moderate to High |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4, MMC5. |
Moderate |
VSR 2 |
The Elements |
Located
immediately to the north of the site |
¡ Commercial ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD. ¡ Open and close view of the site can be seen. |
Medium to High |
DVIC1, DVIC2, IVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3, IVIC4 |
65m |
Moderate to Large |
Moderate to High |
MMC1, MMC2 MMC3, MMC4, MMC5. |
Moderate |
VSR 3 |
The Harbourside |
Located
immediately to the north of the site |
¡ Residential ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD. ¡ Open and close view of the site can be seen. |
High |
DVIC1, DVIC2, IVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3 |
80m |
Moderate |
Moderate to High |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4, MMC5. |
Moderate |
VSR 4 |
The Arch |
Located
immediately to the north of the site and to the west of the
junction of |
¡ Residential ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD and the West Kowloon Terminus. ¡ Open and close view of the site and the West
Kowloon Terminus can be seen. |
High |
DVIC1, DVIC2, IVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3 |
95m |
Moderate |
Moderate to High |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4, MMC5. |
Moderate |
VSR 5 |
|
Located
to the north of the WKCD site, bounded by |
¡ Transportation Facility ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD with ¡ Has a close view of the site. |
Medium |
DVIC1, IVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3, IVIC4 |
30m |
Moderate |
Moderate |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3 |
Slight to Moderate |
VSR 6 |
Planned CDA Development above |
Located
to the north of the WKCD site, bounded by |
¡ Commercial ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD in the foreground with ¡ Has a close view of the site. |
Medium |
DVIC1, DVIC2, IVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3 |
30m |
Moderate |
Moderate |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4, MMC5. |
Moderate |
VSR 7 |
Austin Station |
Located
to the northeast of the WKCD site, bounded by |
¡ Transportation Facility ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction sites of
the WKCD and West Kowloon Terminus with ¡ Has a close view of the site. |
Medium |
DVIC1, IVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3, IVIC4 |
75m |
Moderate |
Moderate |
MMC1,, MCC2, MMC3. |
Slight to Moderate |
VSR 8 |
Planned Residential Development above Austin
Station |
Located
to the northeast of the WKCD site, bounded by |
¡ Residential ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction sites of
the WKCD and West Kowloon terminus with ¡ Has a close view of the site. |
High |
DVIC1, DVIC2, IVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3 |
75m |
Moderate |
Moderate |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4, MMC5. |
Moderate |
VSR 9 |
|
Located
to the northwest of the site |
¡ Transportation Facility ¡ Many |
¡ Only western part of the WKCD site can be viewed. ¡ Views to |
Low |
DVIC1 |
140m |
Negligible |
Negligible |
MMC1 |
Negligible |
VSR 10 |
|
Located
to the north of the intersection of |
¡ Residential ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD and Austin Station with ¡ Has a close and partial view of the site |
Medium to High |
DVIC1, DVIC2, IVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3, IVIC4 |
80m |
Moderate |
Moderate |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4, MMC5. |
Moderate |
VSR 11 |
The |
Located
to the south of the intersection of |
¡ Residential ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD and West Kowloon Terminus with ¡ Has a close and partial view of the site |
High |
DVIC1, DVIC2, IVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3, IVIC4. |
40m |
Moderate |
Moderate to High |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4, MMC5. |
Moderate |
VSR 12 |
|
Located
to the southeast of the site in Tsim Sha Tsui |
¡ Commercial ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the WKCD site and ¡ Open view of the site can be seen in a short
distance. |
Medium to High |
DVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3, IVIC4. |
40m |
Small |
Slight to Moderate |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4 |
Slight to Moderate |
VSR 13 |
Gateway |
Located
to the southeast of the site in Tsim Sha Tsui |
¡ Commercial ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the Pacific Club and the
WKCD site in the foreground with high rise developments located to the north
of the site in the backdrop. ¡ Open view of the site can be seen in a short distance
at upper levels. |
Medium to High |
DVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3. |
250m |
Small |
Slight to Moderate |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4. |
Slight to Moderate |
VSR 14 |
Ocean Centre |
Located
to the southeast of the site in Tsim Sha Tsui |
¡ Commercial ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the Pacific Club and the
WKCD site in the foreground with high rise developments located to the north
of the site in the backdrop. ¡ Partial view of the site can be seen in a short
distance at upper levels. |
Medium to High |
DVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3. |
645m |
Small |
Slight to Moderate |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4. |
Slight to Moderate |
VSR 15 |
Hong Kong Terminal |
Located
to the southeast of the site in Tsim Sha Tsui |
¡ Transportation Facility ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the WKCD site and ¡ Open view of the site can be seen in a short
distance |
Medium |
DVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3. |
220m |
Small |
Slight to Moderate |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4. |
Slight to Moderate |
VSR 16 |
|
Located
to the east of the site, opposite Tsim Sha Tsui fire station, to the west of |
¡ GIC Facility ¡ Medium |
¡ Views from to the site are blocked by the ¡ No view of the site can be seen. ¡ However, part of the site could be viewed after
the fire station is relocated. |
Low |
IVIC1, IVIC2. |
135m |
Negligible |
Negligible |
MMC1, MMC3. |
Negligible |
VSR 17 |
Primary School |
Located
to the east of the site, opposite Tsim Sha Tsui fire station, to the east of |
¡ GIC Facility ¡ Medium |
¡ Views to the site are blocked by the ¡ However, part of the site could be viewed after
the fire station is relocated. |
Low |
IVIC1, IVIC2 |
135m |
Negligible |
Negligible |
MMC1, MMC3. |
Negligible |
VSR 18 |
|
Located to the north of the site, to the east of
Austin Station |
¡ Recreation/ Open Space ¡ Medium |
¡ Existing view comprises Austin Station in the
foreground with high rise developments in the backdrop. ¡ Views to the site at ground level are mostly
blocked by Austin Station. |
Low |
IVIC1 |
155m |
Negligible |
Negligible |
MMC1, MMC3. |
Negligible |
VSR 19 |
Travellers along |
Located
immediately to the north of the site (Various Location) |
¡ Transient ¡ Many |
¡ Varying views depending on locations along ¡ Existing view comprises the WKCD site in the
foreground with ¡ Close and open view of the site. |
Low |
DVIC1, IVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3, IVIC4. |
Varies |
Moderate |
Slight to Moderate |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4. |
Slight |
VSR 20 |
Travellers along Road |
Located
immediately to the east of the site (various locations) |
¡ Transient ¡ Many |
¡ Varying views depending on locations along ¡ Existing view comprises the WKCD site in the
foreground with ¡ Close and open view of the site. |
Low |
DVIC1, IVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3, IVIC4. |
Varies |
Moderate |
Slight to Moderate |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4. |
Slight |
VSR 21 |
Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station |
Located
within the site (at the southeast corner) |
¡ GIC Facility ¡ Few |
¡ Existing view comprises the WKCD site in the
foreground with ¡ Has close and open view of the eastern part of
the site. |
Medium |
DVIC1, IVIC1, IVIC2, IVIC3, IVIC4 |
N/A |
Moderate to Large |
Moderate |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3, MMC4. |
Moderate |
VSR
22VSR 22 |
Phase 1A of the Park |
Located within the WKCD site, in the southern
part of the headland of future the Park (Located to the west of the site) |
¡
Recreation/
Open Space ¡ Medium |
¡
Existing
view comprises the site of the Park (Phase B*) in the foreground and high
rise buildings located to the north of the site in the backdrop. ¡ Views to the site at ground level are partly
blocked by trees in the foreground. |
Low |
DVIC1, DVIC2, IVIC2, IVIC3, IVIC4. |
325m |
Negligible |
Negligible |
MMC1, MMC2, MMC3. |
Negligible |
VSR
23VSR
23 |
Phase 1 of Xiqu Centre |
Located within the WKCD site, close to the
intersection of (Located to the west of the site) |
¡
Arts
and Cultural Facility ¡ Medium |
¡
Existing
view to the northeast of Xiqu Centre comprises the intersection of ¡ Existing view to the south and to the west
of Xiqu Centre comprises the site in the foreground. Open view of the eastern
part of the site can be seen. |
Medium |
N/A** |
75m |
N/A** |
N/A** |
N/A** |
N/A** |
Notes: * Please refer
to Appendix 2.4 (Construction Zone) regarding
Phase B (Zone B) of the Park.
** As
completion date for basement associated with underpass road is in late February
2016, Xiqu Centre will be completed 2 months before the completion of the
underpass road. It is anticipated that the future VSRs at Xiqu Centre may not
have direct view over the underpass road during construction phase. Hence, the assessment
of visual impacts on Xiqu Centre during construction phase could not be
provided.
Table.14.10.16: Significance Threshold of Visual Impact
Before and After Mitigation Measures (Operation Phase)
VSRs |
Name of
VSRs |
Location
of VSRs |
Type &
Approximate Number of VSRs |
Description
of Existing View & Degree of Visibility of DP |
Receiver’s
Sensitivity |
Source of
Impact |
Minimum
Viewing Distance of VSRs |
Magnitude
of Change |
Significance
Threshold of Potential Visual Impact (Before
Mitigation) |
Mitigation
Measures |
Significance
Threshold of Residual Impact |
|
|
|
|
Operation
Phase (Day 1) |
Operation
Phase (Year 10) |
||||||||
VSR 1 |
International Commerce Centre (ICC) |
Located
immediately to the north of the site |
¡ Commercial ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the dense vegetation at
the entrance of the WHC and the construction site of the WKCD. ¡ Open and close view of the site can be seen. |
Medium to High |
DVIO1, DVIO2, DVI03 IVIO1. |
90m |
Small |
Slight to Moderate |
MMO1, MMO2, MMO3, MM04, MM05, MM06 |
Slight |
Insubstantial |
VSR 2 |
The Elements |
Located
immediately to the north of the site |
¡ Commercial ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD. ¡ Open and close view of the site can be seen. |
Medium to High |
DVIO1, DVIO2. DVI03 IVIO1. |
65m |
Small |
Slight to Moderate |
MMO1, MMO2, MM03, MM04, MM05, MM06. |
Slight |
Insubstantial |
VSR 3 |
The Harbourside |
Located
immediately to the north of the site |
¡ Residential ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD. ¡ Open and close view of the site can be seen. |
High |
DVIO1, DVIO2, DVIO3, IVIO1. |
80m |
Small |
Slight to Moderate |
MMO1, MMO2, MMO3, MM04, MM05, MM06. |
Slight |
Insubstantial |
VSR 4 |
The Arch |
Located
immediately to the north of the site and to the west of the
junction of |
¡ Residential ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD and the West Kowloon Terminus. ¡ Open and close view of the site and the West
Kowloon Terminus can be seen. |
High |
DVIO1, DVIO2, DVIO3, IVIO1. |
95m |
Small |
Slight to Moderate |
MMO1, MMO2 MMO3, MM04, MM05, MM06. |
Slight |
Insubstantial |
VSR 5 |
|
Located
to the north of the WKCD site, bounded by |
¡ Transportation Facility ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD with ¡ Has a close view of the site. |
Medium |
DVIO1, DVIO2, DVI03, IVIO1. |
30m |
Small |
Slight |
MMO1, MMO3, MM04, MM05, MM06. |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
VSR 6 |
Planned CDA Development above |
Located
to the north of the WKCD site, bounded by |
¡ Commercial ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD in the foreground with ¡ Has a close view of the site. |
Medium |
DVIO1, DVIO2 DVIO3, IVIO1. |
30m |
Small |
Slight to Moderate |
MMO1, MMO2, MMO3, MM04, MM05, MM06. |
Slight |
Insubstantial |
VSR 7 |
Austin Station |
Located
to the northeast of the WKCD site, bounded by |
¡ Transportation Facility ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction sites of
the WKCD and West Kowloon Terminus with ¡ Has a close view of the site. |
Medium |
DVIO1, DVIO2, DVI03 IVIO1. |
75m |
Small |
Slight to Moderate |
MMO1, MMO3, MM04, MM05, MM06. |
Slight |
Insubstantial |
VSR 8 |
Planned Residential Development above Austin
Station |
Located
to the northeast of the WKCD site, bounded by |
¡ Residential ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction sites of
the WKCD and West Kowloon terminus with ¡ Has a close view of the site. |
High |
DVIO1, DVIO2 DVIO3, IVIO1. |
75m |
Small |
Slight to Moderate |
MMO1, MMO2, MMO3, MM04, MM05, MM06. |
Slight |
Insubstantial |
VSR 9 |
|
Located
to the northwest of the site |
¡ Transportation Facility ¡ Many |
¡ Only western part of the WKCD site can be viewed.
¡ Views to |
Low |
DVIO3 |
140m |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
MMO3, MMO6. |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
VSR 10 |
|
Located
to the north of the intersection of |
¡ Residential ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD and Austin Station with ¡ Has a close and partial view of the site. |
Medium to High |
DVIO1, DVIO2 DVIO3, IVIO1. |
80m |
Small |
Slight to Moderate |
MMO1, MMO2, MMO3, MM04, MM05, MM06. |
Slight |
Insubstantial |
VSR 11 |
The |
Located
to the south of the intersection of |
¡ Residential ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the construction site of
the WKCD and West Kowloon Terminus with ¡ Has a close and partial view of the site. |
High |
DVIO1, DVIO2, DVIO3 IVIO1. |
40m |
Small |
Slight to Moderate |
MMO1, MMO2, MMO3, MM04, MM05, MM06. |
Slight |
Insubstantial |
VSR 12 |
|
Located
to the southeast of the site in Tsim Sha Tsui |
¡ Commercial ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the WKCD site and ¡ Open view of the site can be seen in a short
distance. |
Medium to High |
DVIO1 |
40m |
Negligible |
Slight |
MMO1, MMO2, MM03, MM04. |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
VSR 13 |
Gateway |
Located
to the southeast of the site in Tsim Sha Tsui |
¡ Commercial ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the Pacific Club and the
WKCD site in the foreground with high rise developments located to the north
of the site in the backdrop. ¡ Open view of the site can be seen in a short
distance at upper levels. |
Medium to High |
DVIO1 |
250m |
Negligible |
Slight |
MMO1, MMO2, MM03, MM04. |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
VSR 14 |
Ocean Centre |
Located
to the southeast of the site in Tsim Sha Tsui |
¡ Commercial ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the Pacific Club and the
WKCD site in the foreground with high rise developments located to the north
of the site in the backdrop. ¡ Partial view of the site can be seen in a short
distance at upper levels. |
Medium to High |
DVIO1 |
645m |
Negligible |
Slight |
MMO1, MMO2, MM03, MM04. |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
VSR 15 |
Hong Kong Terminal |
Located
to the southeast of the site in Tsim Sha Tsui |
¡ Transportation Facility ¡ Many |
¡ Existing view comprises the WKCD site and ¡ Open view of the site can be seen in a short
distance |
Medium |
DVIO1 |
220m |
Negligible |
Slight |
MMO1, MMO2, MM03, MM04, MM05. |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
VSR 16 |
|
Located
to the east of the site, opposite Tsim Sha Tsui fire station, to the west of |
¡ GIC Facility ¡ Medium |
¡ Views from to the site are blocked by the ¡ No view of the site can be seen. ¡ However, part of the site could be viewed after
the fire station is relocated. |
Low |
DVI02, IVIO1. |
135m |
Small |
Slight |
MMO1, MMO3, MM04, MM05. |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
VSR 17 |
Primary School |
Located
to the east of the site, opposite Tsim Sha Tsui fire station, to the east of |
¡ GIC Facility ¡ Medium |
¡ Views to the site are blocked by the ¡ However, part of the site could be viewed after
the fire station is relocated. |
Low |
DVI02, IVIO1. |
135m |
Small |
Slight |
MMO1, MMO3, MM04, MM05. |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
VSR 18 |
|
Located to the north of the site, to the east of
Austin Station |
¡ Recreation/ Open Space ¡ Medium |
¡ Existing view comprises Austin Station in the foreground
with high rise developments in the backdrop. ¡ Views to the site at ground level are mostly
blocked by Austin Station. |
Low |
DVIO2, IVIO1 |
155m |
Negligible |
Slight |
MMO1, MMO3, MM04. |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
VSR 19 |
Travellers along |
Located
immediately to the north of the site (Various Location) |
¡ Transient ¡ Many |
¡ Varying views depending on locations along ¡ Existing view comprises the WKCD site in the
foreground with ¡ Close and open view of the site. |
Low |
DVIO1, DVIO2, IVIO1. |
Varies |
Small |
Slight |
MMO1, MMO3, MM04, MM05. |
Slight |
Insubstantial |
VSR 20 |
Travellers along Road |
Located
immediately to the east of the site (various locations) |
¡ Transient ¡ Many |
¡ Varying views depending on locations along ¡ Existing view comprises the WKCD site in the
foreground with ¡ Close and open view of the site. |
Low |
DVIO1, DVIO2, IVIO1. |
Varies |
Small |
Slight |
MMO1, MMO3, MM04, MM05. |
Slight |
Insubstantial |
VSR 21 |
Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station |
Located
within the site (at the southeast corner) |
¡ GIC Facility ¡ Few |
¡ Existing view comprises the WKCD site in the
foreground with ¡ Has close and open view of the eastern part of
the site. |
Medium |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
VSR 22 |
Phase 1A of the Park |
Located within the WKCD site |
¡
Recreation/
Open Space ¡ Medium |
¡
Existing
view comprises the site of the Park (Phase B*) in the foreground and high
rise buildings located to the north of the site in the backdrop. ¡ Views to the site at ground level are partly
blocked by trees in the foreground. |
Low |
DVIO1 |
325m |
Negligible |
Negligible |
MMO1, MMO3, MM04. |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
VSR 23 |
Phase 1 of Xiqu Centre |
Located within the WKCD site |
¡
Arts
and Cultural Facility ¡ Medium |
¡
Existing
view to the northeast of Xiqu Centre comprises the intersection of ¡ Existing view to the south and to the west
of Xiqu Centre comprises the site in the foreground. Open view of the eastern
part of the site can be seen. |
Medium |
DVIO1, DVIO2, DVI03, IVIO1. |
75m |
Small |
Slight |
MMO1, MMO2, MM03, MM04, MM05 |
Slight |
Insubstantial |
Considerations of Alternative Options
Alternative options have been considered to
compare the advantages and disadvantage of different options. It is considered
that underground option is preferred because it minimizes air and noise
pollution. It also has beneficial landscape impact and less visual impact during
operation phase.
The details of Consideration of Alternative
Development Options are provided at Section
14.2.4.
14.10.6 Mitigation Measures
14.10.6.1 Landscape Mitigation Measures
The construction works would inevitably create undesired adverse impacts to the landscape resources and landscape character areas.
Design Measures as Mitigation Measures during Detail Design Stage
Design measures will be developed as mitigation measures during detail design stages.
¡ Transplanting of mature tree in good health and amenity value where appropriate and reinstatement of areas disturbed during construction by compensatory hydro-seeding and planting;
¡ Maximize coverage of greenery tree, shrub and other vegetation planting to compensate the loss of existing trees and amenity planting area;
¡ Providing salt tolerant tree species along the planter strips at the waterfront promenade;
¡ Temporary greening measures, e.g. roadside ornamental planting in removable planters around peripheral of site works area as temporary screening and carry out removal green roof panel/vertical green panel on the roof/facade of site offices during construction works;
¡ Maximize the opportunity of soft landscape treatments, such as vertical green wall/climber/roof greening, etc, to soften the hard architectural and engineering structures and facilities;
¡ Landscape design shall be incorporated to architectural and engineering structures in order to provide aesthetically pleasing designs.
Mitigation Measures to be applied during Construction and Operation Phase
To reduce
the impact towards the existing landscape resources, mitigation measures are
proposed and summarized in Table 14.10.17
and Table 14.10.18. Generally, mitigation measures shall be implemented as
early as possible and many of these measures perform multiple functions.
Table 14.10.17: Landscape mitigation measures during construction phase
Ref. No. |
Mitigation Measures during Construction Phase |
Funding Agency |
Implementation Agency |
Management/ Maintenance
Agency |
CM1 |
Trees should be retained in situ on site as far as possible. Should tree removal be unavoidable due to construction impacts, trees will be transplanted or felled with reference to the stated criteria in the Tree Removal Applications to be submitted to relevant government departments for approval in accordance to ETWB TCW No. 29/2004 and 3/2006. |
WKCDA -for work area within
WKCD site CEDD - for work areas of
external connections Private Developer -for works areas within private land sale lots |
Contractor |
Appointed landscape contractor |
CM2 |
Compensatory tree planting shall be incorporated to the
proposed project and maximize the
new tree, shrubs and other vegetation planting to compensate tree felled and
vegetation removed. Also, implementation of compensatory planting
should be of a ratio not less than 1:1 in terms of quality and quantity
within the site. |
WKCDA |
Contractor |
WKCDA or appointed landscape
contractor |
CM3 |
Buffer trees for screening purposes to soften the hard
architectural and engineering structures and facilities. |
WKCDA |
Contractor |
WKCDA or appointed landscape
contractor |
CM4 |
Softscape treatments such as vertical green wall panel / planting of climbing and/or weeping plants, etc, to maximize the green coverage and soften the hard architectural and engineering structures and facilities. |
WKCDA |
Detailed Design Consultant /
Contractor |
WKCDA or appointed landscape
contractor |
CM5 |
Roof greening by means of intensive and extensive green roof to maximize the green coverage and improve aesthetic appeal and visual quality of the building/structure. |
WKCDA |
Detailed Design Consultant /
Contractor |
WKCDA or appointed landscape
constractor |
CM6 |
Sensitive streetscape design should be incorporated along all new roads and streets. |
WKCDA |
Detailed Design Consultant /
Contractor |
WKCDA or appointed landscape
constractor |
CM7 |
Structure, ornamental planting shall be provided along amenity strips to enhance the landscape quality. |
WKCDA |
Contractor |
Appointed landscape contractor |
CM8 |
Landscape
design shall be incorporated to architectural and engineering structures in
order to provide aesthetically pleasing designs. |
WKCDA |
Detailed Design Consultant / Contractor |
WKCDA or appointed landscape constractor |
Table 14.10.18: Landscape mitigation measures during operation phase
Ref. No. |
Mitigation Measures during Operation Phase |
Funding Agency |
Implementation Agency |
Management/ Maintenance Agency |
OM1 |
Provide
proper planting maintenance on the new planting areas to enhance the aesthetic
design degree |
WKCDA -for work area within
WKCD site CEDD- for work areas of
external connections Private Developer -for works areas within private land sale lots |
Contractor |
LCSD -for public roadside and
pedestrian footbridge planting1 Private Developers -for all
landscaping within the private land sale lots WKCDA -for all other areas
within WKCD |
OM2 |
Provision of
open space in various forms and at different levels on or above ground,
including park, waterfront promenade, piazzas and terrace garden and
associated green connections for public environment. |
WKCDA |
Detailed Design Consultant / Contractor |
WKCDA or appointed landscape
contractor |
1 in accordance with ETWB No.
2/2004
The Landscape Master Plan and general
landscape arrangement for the WKCD development is shown in Figure 14.10.15. The plan is
preliminary and for illustrative purpose only and subject to further amendment
in detailed design stage. List of landscape mitigation measures during
construction and operation phase are shown in Figure 14.10.14. Details of
landscape mitigation measures are shown in Figure 14.10.15 to 14.10.18.
14.10.6.2 Significance Threshold of Residual Impact (Before and After Mitigation Measures)
The significance threshold of each LR and
LCA has been derived through the assessment of sensitivity and magnitude of
change associated with the proposed works. Table 14.10.1
shows the relationship between sensitivity and magnitude of change. The
efficiency and success of proposed mitigation measures are taken in
consideration when analyzing the significance of the threshold of residual
impact after mitigation.The residual impact of each LR and LCA regarding the
significance threshold before and after mitigation measures are summarized in
the Table 14.10.19
and Table 14.10.20.
Table 14.10.19: Significance of impacts on landscape resources during construction and operation phases
LR No. |
Landscape Resources |
Sensitivity
(Low,
Medium, High) |
Magnitude of Change (Negligible, Small, Intermediate, Large) |
Significance Threshold of impacts before Mitigation
(Insubstantial, Slight, Moderate, Substantial) |
Recommended Mitigation Measures |
Significance Threshold of Residual Impact after Mitigation
(Insubstantial, Slight, Moderate, Substantial) |
||||||||
Construction Phase |
Operation |
|||||||||||||
Construction Phase |
Operation Phase |
Construction Phase |
Operation Phase |
Construction Phase |
Operation Phase |
Day 1 |
Year 10 |
|||||||
LR1: Open Space |
||||||||||||||
LR1.1 |
|
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR1.4 |
Roof top
Garden on Hong Kong China Ferry Terminal |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR1.5 |
|
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR1.6 |
|
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR1.7 |
Temporary
Open Space along the Waterfront Promenade within the Site Boundary |
Medium |
Medium |
Small |
Negligible |
Slight (adverse) |
Insubstantial |
CM7 to CM8; OM1 and OM2 |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Slight (beneficial) |
|||
LR1.8 |
|
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR1.15 |
Public Open Space at the podium of Kowloon
Station |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2: Amenity Planting |
||||||||||||||
LR2.1 |
Roadside
|
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.2 |
Roadside
|
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.3 |
Amenity |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.5 |
Roadside
Trees along |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.6 |
Roadside
|
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.7 |
Amenity
Planting Strip along |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.8 |
Trees
along the |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.9 |
Roadside
|
High |
High |
Intermediate |
Intermediate |
Moderate (adverse) |
Moderate (adverse) |
CM1, CM2; OM1 |
Slight (adverse) |
Insubstantial |
Slight (beneficial) |
|||
LR2.10 |
Roadside
Trees along Scout Path |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.11 |
Roadside
Trees along |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.13 |
Roadside
|
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.14 |
Roadside
|
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.15 |
Roadside
|
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.16 |
Roadside
|
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.17 |
Roadside
|
Low |
Low |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.27 |
Amenity Planting within the private development
at the Kowloon Station |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.28 |
Roadside
|
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.29 |
Roadside
|
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.30 |
Roadside
|
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.31 |
Trees
Buffering |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.32 |
Roadside
|
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.33 |
Trees
along New Yau Ma Tei Typhoon Shelter Pier |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.34 |
Amenity
Planting within Salt Water Pumping Station |
Low |
Low |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.35 |
Tree
Cluster in the Western Part within the Boundary Area |
Low |
Low |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.36 |
Tree
Cluster in the Eastern Part within the Boundary
Area |
Medium |
Medium |
Intermediate |
Negligible |
Moderate (adverse) |
Insubstantial |
CM1 to CM8; OM1 |
Slight (adverse) |
Insubstantial |
Slight (beneficial) |
|||
LR2.37 |
Amenity Planting at the end of |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR2.38 |
Trees next to |
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR3: Water Body |
||||||||||||||
LR3.1 |
|
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR4: Cultural Heritage and Historical
Features |
||||||||||||||
LR4.1 |
|
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR4.2 |
St.
Andrew’s Church and |
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR4.3 |
|
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
LR4.4
|
Built
Heritage within |
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
|||
*Notes: Impact is evaluated base on the assumption that
possible piers will be included in the proposed plan.
Table 14.10.20: Significance of impacts on landscape character area during construction and operation phases (all impacts are adverse unless otherwise stated)
ID. No. |
Landscape Character Areas |
Sensitivity (Low, Medium, High) |
Magnitude of Change (Negligible, Small, Intermediate, Large) |
Significance Threshold of Impact before Mitigation
(Insubstantial, Slight, Moderate, Substantial) |
Recommended Mitigation Measures |
Significance Threshold of Residual Impact after Mitigation
(Insubstantial, Slight, Moderate, Substantial) |
|||||
Construction Phase |
Operation |
||||||||||
Construction Phase |
Operation Phase |
Construction Phase |
Operation Phase |
Construction Phase |
Operation Phase |
Day 1 |
Year 10 |
||||
Existing
Landscape Character Areas |
|||||||||||
LCA01 |
|
Low |
Low |
Intermediate |
Intermediate |
Moderate (adverse) |
Moderate (adverse) |
CM1 to CM3, CM5; OM1 |
Slight (adverse) |
Insubstantial |
Slight (beneficial) |
LCA02 |
|
Low |
Low |
Intermediate |
Intermediate |
Moderate (adverse) |
Moderate (adverse) |
CM1 to CM8 ; OM1 |
Slight (adverse) |
Insubstantial |
Slightly (beneficial) |
LCA03 |
|
Low |
Low |
Small |
Small |
Slight
(adverse) |
Slight (adverse) |
CM3 to CM8; OM1 and OM2 |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Slightly (beneficial) |
LCA04 |
New Yau
Ma Tei Typhoon Shelter Landscape |
Low |
Low |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
LCA05 |
|
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
LCA06 |
|
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
LCA07 |
New Yau
Ma Tei Container Terminal Landscape |
Low |
Low |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
LCA08 |
|
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
LCA09 |
Tsim Sha
Tsui Late 20C / early 21C Commercial / Residential Complex Landscape |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
LCA10 |
Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong
Kong Express Rail Link (XRL) Terminus Construction Site and Austin Station |
Low |
Low |
Small |
Small |
Slight (adverse) |
Slight (adverse) |
CM13 to CM8; OM1 |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Slightly (beneficial) |
LCA11 |
|
High |
High |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
LCA12 |
|
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
LCA13 |
Tsim Sha
Tsui Organic Mixed Urban Development Landscape |
Medium |
Medium |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
- |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
Insubstantial |
LCA14 |
Tsim Sha
Tsui Commercial / Retail Complex Landscape |
Medium |
Medium |
Intermediate |
Intermediate |
Moderate (adverse) |
Moderate (adverse) |
CM1, CM2; OM1 |
Slight (adverse) |
Insubstantial |
Slightly (beneficial) |
14.10.6.3 Visual Mitigation Measures
Representative view from the key VSRs has been
selected to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures.
Photomontages of the viewpoint viewed by the selective key VSRs (i.e. VSR 14)
is shown in Figures 14.10.13a to 14.10.13b.
Visual Mitigation
Measures during Construction Phase
The
visual impact of the temporary ventilation shafts associated with the underpass
road at a prominent location within the WKCD would be
dependent on the final design and the manner in which it will be integrated
with the future buildings in the WKCD. The scale,
location, disposition, design and integration strategies of these ventilation
shafts would however be further refined in the detailed design stage such that
their visual impacts would be minimal.
In addition to the use of decorative screen
hoarding boards, early introduction of landscape treatments and adoption of
light colour for the temporary ventilation shaft, control of night time
lighting will be used as visual mitigation measure to ensure that the lighting
does not split onto other non-related areas that may pose visual impacts to the
potential VSRs nearby. There will be temporary landscaped areas with green
cover at some of the CACF’s site during construction phase prior to completion
of the CACF, to help reduce the visual impacts derived by the construction
works in the surroundings. A summary of the visual mitigation measures to be
implemented during construction phase is shown in Table 14.10.21.
Table 14.10.21: Visual Mitigation Measures during Construction Phase
|
Mitigation Measures |
Target VSRs |
Funding Agency |
Implementation Agency |
Management/ Maintenance Agency |
MMC1 |
Use of decorative screen hoarding/ boards |
All of the VSRs |
WKCDA – for work area within WKCD site CEDD – for work areas of external connection |
Contractor |
Contractor |
MMC2 |
During the transition period, the temporary ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road for the basement will adopt light colour |
All of the VSRs |
WKCDA |
Design Architect / Contractor |
WKCDA |
MMC3 |
The early introduction of landscape treatments |
All of the VSRs |
WKCDA |
Contractor |
Contractor |
MMC4 |
The temporary landscaped areas will help achieve the visual balance. |
All of the VSRs |
WKCDA |
Contractor |
WKCDA |
MMC5 |
Control of night time lighting such as avoidance of lighting from spilling onto nearby residential developments |
Residential VSR (ie. VSR 3) |
WKCDA – for work area within WKCD site |
Contractor |
Contractor |
Visual Mitigation
Measures during Operation Phase
During operation phase (day 1), the temporary ventilation shafts
associated with the underpass road wll still be present and there are still
some construction activities within WKCD site. To reduce the visual impacts
derived by these temporary ventilation shafts, mitigation measures such as
adoption of light colour for these ventilation shafts, temporary landscaped
areas with green cover and portable planters will be adopted.
Since the ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road will be
integrated with the entire WKCD development upon the completion of the WKCD
development, these ventilation shafts will no longer be visible as individual
structures during operation phase (year 10). As most of the structures of the
Project are located underground, roadside planting and aesthetic design of
roads are the proposed mitigation measures to reduce the visual impacts derived
by the underpass road.
Control of night time lighting such as avoidance of lighting from
spilling onto nearby residential developments will be used to mitigate the
night time visual impacts during operation phase (day 1 and year 10).
A summary of the visual mitigation measures
to be implemented during operation phase is shown in Table 14.10.22.
Table 14.10.22: Visual mitigation measures during Operation Phase
|
Mitigation Measures |
Target VSRs |
Funding Agency |
Implementation Agency |
Management/ Maintenance Agency |
MMO1 |
Adoption of light colour for the temporary ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road during operation phase (day 1) |
All of the VSRs |
WKCDA |
Design Architect/ Contractor |
WKCDA/ Developer of individual buildings |
MMO2 |
Temporary landscaped area with planters will help
achieve the visual balance during operation phase (day 1) |
All of the VSRs |
WKCDA |
Contractor |
Contractor |
MMO3 |
Planters and other softscape treatments during operation phase (day 1) |
All of the VSRs |
WKCDA |
Contractor |
Contractor |
MMO4 |
Use of decorative screen hoarding / boards during operation phase (day 1) |
All of the VSRs |
WKCDA – for work area within WKCD site |
Contractor |
Contractor |
MMO5 |
Aesthetic design of roads and roadside planting during operation phase (year 10) |
VSRs abutting the entrance of the underground roads VSR 2 (The Elements( and VSR 7 ( |
WKCDA |
Contractor |
Contractor |
MMO6 |
Control of night time lighting such as avoidance of lighting from spilling onto nearby residential developments During operation phase (day 1 and year 10) |
Residential VSR (i.e. VSR 3) |
WKCDA – for work area within WKCD site |
Contractor |
Contractor |
14.10.6.4 Programme of Implementation of Landscape and
Visual Mitigation Measures
The construction phase measures listed in Table 14.10.17 and Table 14.10.21 should be adopted from commencement
of construction, and shall be in place throughout the entire construction
period. The operation phase measures listed in Table 14.10.18 and Table 14.10.22 should be adopted during the
detailed design stage, and be built as part of the construction, so that they
are in place at the date of commissioning of the Project. It should be noted
that the soft landscape mitigation measures would not be appreciated for
several years.
As the proposed underpass road will be constructed as subdivided zones
at different time, it is assumed that the construction of underpass road will
occur at the same time as construction of the WKCD facilities. General good
site practice will be adopted for all construction activities.
14.10.7 Evaluation of Cumulative and Residual Impacts
14.10.7.1 Cumulative impacts
An assessment of the cumulative landscape
and visual impacts of the underpass road and the committed developments in the
surrounding areas of the site has been undertaken. This considers changes that
will result in conjunction with other existing and foreseeable proposals. The
concurrent designated projects include the XRL and WKT, road works at West
Kowloon, Road Improvement Works in West Kowloon Reclamation Development - Phase
1 and II and Central Kowloon Route, which pose cumulative impacts together with
the underpass road on LRs, LCAs and VSRs.
The sources of impact from concurrent
projects during the construction and operation phases are summarised as Table 14.10.23.
Table 14.10.23: Potential
cumulative landscape and visual impacts from concurrent project
Proposed Development |
Construction Phase |
Operation Phase |
Express Rail Link (and WKT) |
Construction of diaphragm wall and foundations, excavation, concreting and backfill works as well as the operation of concrete batching plant and barging points, etc. |
Above-ground structures including WKT and ventilation
buildings in |
Road Works at |
Excavation, road/underpasses construction and construction of noise screening structures, etc. |
Structures such as noise barriers. |
Road Improvement Works in |
Excavation, roads/ underpasses construction and construction of noise screening structures, etc |
Structures such as noise barriers |
Central |
Construction of a trunk road and tunnel, with administration and ventilation buildings; and associated works. |
Structures such as ventilation buildings |
Table 14.10.24 shows the summary of the affected LRs and LCAs and VSRs and potential
cumulative impacts generated by the concurrent designated projects in the
adjacent areas and the proposed WKCD development.
Table 14.10.24: Summary of LRs, LCAs and VSRs affected by concurrent projects
Concurrent
Designated Projects |
Affected LRs/LCAs |
Affected VSRs |
Express Rail Link (and WKT) |
As construction is in progress, accumulative impacts are minimal. |
Construction Phase and Operation Phase VSR 2,VSR 4, VSR 7, VSR 8, VSR 19, VSR 21 and VSR 23 |
Road works at |
Construction Phase and Operation Phase VSR1, VSR 2, VSR3, VSR 4, VSR5, VSR 6, VSR 7, VSR 8, VSR 10, VSR 11,VSR 19 and VSR 23 |
|
Road Improvement Works in |
Construction Phase and Operation Phase VSR 10, VSR 11, VSR 16 ,VSR 17, VSR 18, VSR 20 and VSR 23 |
|
Central |
N/A |
Affected
LRs/LCAs
Cumulative
Impacts on Landscape Resources during Construction and Operation Phase
The concurrent projects in the surrounding
area are concentrated at the northern site boundary. As the construction of the
concurrent projects is in progress, accumulative landscape impacts to affected
landscape resources are minimal.
Construction activities might cause
disturbances to the landscape resources in the surrounding area. For instance,
dust and construction noise may deteriorate the value and usage of the
surrounding open space. Dust and pollutant emissions due to traffic congestion
and excavation works during construction stage of underpass road may affect the
health of existing trees. Given the numbers of tree immediately located within
the construction area of the underpass road is relatively smaller number, and
these indirect impacts are considered to be low.
With the implementation of proposed
mitigation landscape measures (including compensatory tree planting) during
construction phase, it is considered that there would not have any additional insurmountable
landscape impact during construction phase. Tree loss due to the construction
of Austin Road Flyover and concurrent project will be compensated in a ratio of
1:1 or more in construction phase. Compensatory tree will be located within the
site boundary. It is expected to have a
net gain of trees. The residual cumulative impacts on existing
trees during operation phase will be slight in Day 1 and insubstantial in Year
10.
Cumulative Impacts on Landscape Character
Area during Construction and Operation Phase
It is expected that construction of
Underpass Road and other concurrent projects, i.e. XRL Terminus,
Residential/CDA development above Austin Station and Road Works at West Kowloon
and Central Kowloon Route will affect both LCA09 and LCA10, which LCA 10 is
also under a change on ongoing development. As the construction of concurrent
projects is in progress, accumulative landscape impacts to affected LCAs are
minimal. However, as the construction of the
As a
whole, cumulative impacts on LCAs will not create additional insurmountable
adverse impact with the implementation of mitigation measures.
Affected
VSRs during Construction Phase
Hong
Kong Section of the
The sources of the visual impacts include construction
of above ground structures such as the station, ventilation shafts and
buildings. Hence, the affected VSRs are those located along the Express Rail
Link and the station of West Kowloon Terminus, including VSR 2 the Elements, VSR
4 The Arch, VSR 7 Austin Station, VSR
8 Planned Residential Development above Austin Station, VSR 19 Travellers along Austin Road West and VSR 21 Tsim Sha Tsui fire station, VSR 23 Phase 1 of Xiqu Centre.
Road works at
Road
works at
Road
Improvement Works in
The
proposed road improvement works involve construction at
The assessment of cumulative visual impacts
of the underpass road also needs to take the proposed WKCD development into the
consideration. The construction phase of the underpass road coincides with the
construction phase of these four projects. Hence, there are various construction
activates undertaken at the project site and its surroundings. In addition to
construction activities, a major source of impact is the disturbance to the
existing vegetation which may lead to the loss of some visual resources.
It is considered that the combined cumulative
visual impacts posed on most of the aforementioned VSRs during construction
phase, in particular the nearby residential VSRs, are significant.
Affected
VSRs during Operation Phase
Hong
Kong Section of the
During operation phase of the underpass road,
the XRL project will be mostly completed and potential landscape and visual impacts is likely to be confined to minor above-ground
works such as completion of the facades and interiors of the WKT station,
ventilation shafts and buildings (based on their target completion by 2015). Hence
while there may be some impacts on the visual amenity of the surrounding areas
and VSRs located in proximity to the site, including VSR 2 The Elements, VSR 4
The Arch, VSR 7 Austin Station, VSR 8 Planned Residential Development above
Austin Station and VSR 19 Travellers along Austin Road West, it is anticipated
that the visual impact will be moderately significant, and upon completion of
the WKT, visual impacts will be further mitigated via the landscape design integrating the WKT and the WKCD to provide a
continuous landscaped open
area.
It should be noted however, that visual impacts to VSRs will become substantial upon completion of the planned
high rise buildings above the West Kowloon Terminus and Austin Station,
particularly to the nearby residential developments because of the loss of open
view, which will eventually be partially / substantially blocked by these high
rise developments above West Kowloon Terminus and Austin Station.
Road
Works at
During operation phase of the underpass road,
it is expected that construction of the Road works at
Road
Improvement Works in
Based on
the target completion date for this project, Phase I will be completed by operation
phase of the underpass road, hence the cumulative impacts during operation phase is anticipated to be small,
especially with appropriate mitigation measures such as road side amenity
planting.
The
programme for construction of Phase II is not yet known, however, with
substantial completion of the WKCD development and other concurrent projects in
the vicinity, it is anticipated that the remaining visual impacts on VSRs near the junction of
14.10.7.2 Residual impacts
Residual
Landscape Impact during Construction Phase
Despite the mitigation measures mentioned in
Section 14.10.6, it is inevitable
that certain residual impacts would still be placed on the site, both during
construction and operation phases. The residual impacts on landscape resources
and landscape character areas are generally insubstantial to slight beneficial.
Residual
Impact on Landscape Resources during Construction and Operation Phase
Impact on LR1 Open Space
LR 1.7 – Temporary open space along the
waterfront promenade within the site boundary
Relatively small area (~0.03ha) of temporary
open space to the public will be affected. Affected area consists of parts of
the road and cycling track with associated street planting. However, as the
construction of underpass road may be at the same time with the construction of
the Park and waterfront promenade, there will be slight adverse residual
impact on this LR during construction phase due to the construction of
underpass road. During operation phase, affected area of LR will become part of
the Park for public enjoyment, with minimum 23ha of
open space for public use will be provided within the site boundary. With the
re-provided vegetation grows and established and enhancement of landscape
quality with the provision of the open space during operation phase in this LR,
residual impact on this LR will become insubstantial in Day 1 and slight
beneficial in Year 10.
Impact on LR2 Roadside Amenity
LR2.9 – Roadside
Total 12 trees will be felled and 3 trees
will be transplanted due to the construction of the underpass road during
construction phase. Tree species to be affected include Acacia confusa, Aleruites
moluccana, Ficus elastica, Ficus microcarpa, Macaranga tanarius, Litsea
glutinosa, Clausema lansium and Morus alba.
During construction phase, new compensatory trees with 3 no. transplanted tree
will be provided within the site, it is considered as moderate adverse residual
impact on this LR. With the re-provided vegetation grows and established and
enhancement of landscape quality during operation phase in this LR, residual
impact on this LR will become insubstantial
in Day 1 and slight beneficial in Year 10 with the implementation of mitigation
measures.
LR2.36 – Tree
Cluster in the Eastern Part within the Boundary Area
Total 30 trees with grassland (~0.08ha) will
be felled during the site clearance works of the construction of underpass
road. However, this relatively small affected area will be further reinstated
into part of the Park and Avenue with new compensatory trees within this LR. Aesthetic
landscape design, with new compensatory trees, will be incorporated to
architectural/engineering structures to enhance the landscape quality of this
LR during construction phase, it is considered there
will be slight adverse residual impact on this LR. With the re-provided vegetation grows and
established and enhancement of landscape quality during operation phase in this
LR,, residual impact on this LR will become insubstantial
in Day 1 and slight beneficial in Year 10 with the implementation of mitigation
measures..
Impact on
Existing Trees
Based on the broad brush tree survey,
approximately 3567 trees are surveyed within the assessment boundary. There are
total 387 trees (15 trees in LR2.9 and 372 trees in LR2.36) will be affected by
construction of underpass road. All
of them are located within the WKCD site boundary. There are approximately 42
trees (12 trees in LR2.9 and 30 trees in LR2.36) with self-seed species and/or
poor health and tree form will be felled, 3 trees in LR2.9 with fair health
condition and tree form and medium amenity value will be transplanted and 342
trees in LR2.36, with no direct conflicts with the construction of underpass
road will be retained in situ. It is considered transplanted tree will be
recovered after Year 10. With the implementation of new compensatory tree and
transplanted trees to be provided within the sie during construction phase, the
residual impact is considered slight beneficial. Many of them are not
recommended to be transplanted as they are either in poor form and health or
weed species. None of the affected tree is LCSD Champion Trees or Registered
Old and Valuable Trees. There are no rare species or endangered species but
common species. All trees with medium to high amenity value, which are
unavoidably affected by construction works will be
transplanted within the site. Detail tree felling application and compensatory
planting proposal will be submitted in accordance with ETWB TC 3/2006 during
the detailed design stage. Implementation of compensatory planting should be of
a ratio not less than 1:1 in terms of quality and quantity within the site. The
quality of compensatory trees should be at least of “heavy standard” (Section 3
of the General Specification for Civil Engineering Works refers). Proposals
which deviate from this principle will be supported with justification, in
order to ensure the greening opportunity within the site is optimised where
feasible. Also, sufficient space will be provided for the planting of
compensatory trees with the consideration of minimum space required to cater
for the establishment and healthy growth of the trees.
Affected tree
species include Acacia auriculiformis,
Acacia confusa, Aleurities moluccana, Casuarina equisetifolia, Celtis sinensis,
Clausena lansium, Ficus microcarpa, Ficus elastica, Ficus virens, Hibiscus
tiliaceus, Leucaena leucocephala, Litsea glutinosa, Macaranga tanarius, Melia
azedarach and Morus alba. The majority of tree species affected is
self-seeded weed Leucaena leucocephala.
The condition of the tree range from poor to fair. Amenity value range from low to medium.
The actual number of trees to be transplanted/felled should depend on the result of a more
detailed tree survey on the affected trees. The quantities of tree affected are
summarized in Table 14.10.25.
Table 14.10.25: Residual impacts on existing trees during construction phase
Ref. No. |
Landscape Resources |
Source of Impact |
|
Residual Impacts during Construction Phase |
||
|
|
|
Total no. of
tree in LR |
No of trees to
be felled |
No of trees to
be transplanted |
No of trees to
be retained |
LR2.9 |
Roadside |
LC1-1 to
LC1-6 |
15 |
12 |
3 |
0 |
LR2.36* |
Trees
Cluster in the Eastern Part within the Boundary Area |
LC1-1, LC1-2, LC1-4 to LC1-6 |
372 |
30 |
0 |
342 |
|
|
Total: 387 no.
affected trees |
387 |
42 |
3 |
342 |
* Note that some trees located in LR2.36 are
currently being relocated to areas around LR2.31 by LCSD, hence the actual tree
numbers are subject to further changes.
The compensatory tree planting and new
landscape works as mitigation measures to the loss of greenery are proposed for
the underpass road. As the landscape quality of the existing trees is low, the
proposed substantial number of new tree plantings as a mitigation measures are
sufficient to compensate the loss of existing trees. The overall cumulative
residual impacts on existing trees are considered to be beneficial in the
longer term after development. The beneficial impact would substantially
increase with time after trees reach maturity.
Residual Impact on LR3 Waterbody and LR4
Cultural Heritage and Historical Features
None of these landscape resources will be
affected during construction and operation phase as the location of these LRs
are too far from the proposed underpass road.
Residual Impact on Landscape Character Area
during Construction and Operation Phase
The residual impact on landscape
character areas are generally insubstantial to slight adverse
during construction phase and insubstantial to slight beneficial
during operation phase. The residual impact on landscape character areas during
operation phase are mostly considered to be beneficial in the long term. Details
are summarised in Table
14.10.26.
Table 14.10.26: Residual impacts on landscape
character areas during construction and operation phase
Ref. No. |
Landscape Character Areas |
Residual Impact on Landscape Character Areas |
Existing
Landscape Character Areas |
||
LCA01 |
|
Approximately
0.39ha of this LCA will be affected by the construction of underpass road
which will result to the existing trees to be felled and incompatibility to
the LCA. There are total 100 trees (in LR2.36) in this LCA, of which 10 trees
will be felled with grassland (~0.03ha) and 90 trees with no direct conflict
with the construction of underpass road will be retained in situ. With the new
compensatory tree to be provided within the site, there will be slight adverse residual impact
on this LCA during construction phase. As LCA01 will be under construction
and largely become Park area and part of the M+ extension area, MPV, Hotel
and the With the
re-provided vegetation grows and established and enhancement of landscape
quality during operation phase, residual impact on this LCA in Day 1 of operation
phase is considered to be insubstantial
and become slightly beneficial for better connection within WKCD
in Year 10 of operation phase. |
LCA02 |
|
Approximately
19.68ha of this LCA02 will be affected by the construction of underpass road,
which will result to existing trees will be felled and incompatibility to the
LCA. There are total 272 trees (in LR2.36) in this LCA, of which 20 trees
will be felled with grassland (~0.05ha) and 90 trees with no direct conflict
with the construction of underpass road will be retained in situ. With the new
compensatory tree to be provided within the site, there will be slight
adverse residual impact on this LCA during construction phase. As LCA02
will be under construction and mainly become the waterfront promenade, avenue
area, and part of the Park area during operation phase, which will convert
the currently ununsed space into a flexible public open space for public. It
will be a vibrant public space with landscape softworks to increase amenity
value. With the re-provided
vegetation grows and established and enhancement of landscape quality during
operation phase, residual impact on this LCA during operation phase is
considered to be insubstantial in Day
1 and slightly beneficial in Year 10 during operation phase |
LCA03 |
|
Relatively
small area (~0.03ha) of this LCA will be affected by the construction of
underpass road, which will result to the loss of temporary open space
(~0.03ha) in LR1.7 and incompatibility to the LCA. With the new compensatory
tree to be provided within the site, there will be slight adverse
residual impact on this LCA during construction phase. However, as LCA03 will be under construction and substituted by a newly designed waterfront promenade providing better facilitates and open space quality. Also, the operation phase of underpass road facilitates the public enjoyment With the re-provided vegetation grows and established and provision of open space during operation phase, the residual impact in Day 1 of operation phase is considered to be insubstantial and become slightly beneficial in Year 10. |
LCA10 |
Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL) Terminus Construction Site and Austin Station |
Approximately 0.06ha of this LCA will be affected by the construction
of underpass road, which will result incompatibility to the LCA. As the
affected area is relatively small and new ornamental trees to be planted
within the site, there will be insubstantial
residual impact on this LCA during construction stage. During operation phase, part of this LCA will become the entrance of
the underpass road. With the re-provided vegetation grows and established
during operation phase, the residual impact in day 1 of operation phase is
considered to be insubstantial and become slight beneficial in Year 10 with
mitigation measures during operation phase. |
LCA14 |
Tsim Sha
Tsui Commercial/ Retail Complex Landscape |
Approximately 0.24ha of this LCA will be affected by the construction
of underpass road, which will result 12 tree will be felled and 3 trees will
be transplanted in LR2.9 (total 15 trees) and incompatibility to the LCA. With the new
compensatory tree to be provided within the site during construction phase,
there will be slight adverse
residual impact on this LCA. During operation phase, part of this LCA will become the entrance of the underpass road and under construction and substituted as part of the waterfront promenade and WKCD area. It will be a vibrant public space with landscape softworks to provide amenity values along with the newly designed waterfront promenade. The operation phase of underpass road also facilitates the public enjoyment. With the re-provided vegetation grows and established and further enhance of landscape quality during operation phase, residual impact is considered to be insubstantial in Day 1 and slight beneficial Year 10 with implementation of mitigation measures during operation phase. |
Residual Visual Impact during
Construction Phase
Given
that the development scale of the Project is localized, the residual visual
impact on the VSRs is considered to be slight or insubstantial with the
implementation of mitigation measures like erection of decorative screen
hoarding, adoption of light colour for temporary ventilation shafts associated
with the underpass road, temporary landscaped area with planters and early
introduction of landscape treatments. However, the mitigation measures proposed
at ground level would not be able to mitigate the visual impacts for views from
the higher levels of some of the VSRs, in particular for those along
Residual Visual Impact during Operation
Phase
Residual visual impacts during operation phase will be confined to the VSRs in close proximity to the above ground structures associated with the underpass road, where they have direct and full views to these future structures.
Residual visual impact during operation phase (day 1) would be generally derived by the temporary ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road. The residual visual impact on the VSRs during operation phase (day 1) is considered to be slight with the implementation of mitigation measures such as adoption of light colour for temporary ventilation shafts for the underpass road and temporary landscaped area with planters.
With the implementation of design and mitigation measures such as incorporation of aesthetic road as well as roadside tree planting, the residual adverse impacts on these VSRs are considered to be slight during operation phase (Year 10).
It is
considered that the VSRs located to the southeast of the site (i.e. the VSRs
located along
VSRs located further away, and transient VSRs, will only have partial or glimpsed views of the underpass road, therefore the residual impact on these VSRs is considered to be insubstantial.
14.10.8 Environmental Monitoring and Audit
In addition to
ensure the effective implementation of mitigation measure recommended in Section 14.10.6 and compliance with
relevant environment standards; systematic procedures for monitoring, auditing
and minimizing the environmental impacts associated with construction and
operation phase is required.
During the construction and operation phase, monitoring programme are required to ensure that Contractors and Operators properly carry out mitigation measures and evaluate the actual impact on landscape and visual amenity. This should be undertaken by a Registered Landscape Architect (RLA), or capable person, as landscape auditor. Corrective actions should be undertaken if there are unacceptable adverse impacts.
14.10.9 Conclusion
The
WKCD is to be developed into a world-class integrated arts and cultural
district to enrich the arts and cultural life for the people in
There are 38 LRs, 14 LCAs and 23 representative VSRs identified within the assessment area that may be affected by underpass road. There will be slight adverse to moderate adverse impacts on some LRs, LCAs and VSRs at close proximity to the site during construction phase. However, impacts during construction phase are temporary only.
In
addition, impacts on the landscape
resources are considered to be minimal during operation phase since it is
located underground.
Despite the temporary ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road will be visible during operation phase (day 1), they will be integrated with the WKCD buildings and they will no longer be visible as individual structures upon completion of the entire WKCD development. Hence they will not be visually prominent and thus it is anticipated that the visual impacts during operation phase (year 10) is slight.
As the underpass road is mostly located underground, the overall residual landscape and visual impacts associated with the construction and operation phases of the underpass road are anticipated to be acceptable with the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures and in the long term beneficial.
14.11 Environmental Monitoring and Audit
14.11.1 Air Quality Impact
14.11.1.1 Construction Phase
Regular dust monitoring is considered necessary during the construction phase of the Project and regular site audits are also required to ensure the dust control measures are properly implemented. Details of the environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) programme will be presented in the stand-alone EM&A Manual.
14.11.1.2 Operation Phase
Since it has been assessed that all the ASRs would be in compliance with all the relevant AQOs for SO2, NO2 and RSP, no residual air quality impacts due to vehicular or marine traffic emissions are anticipated. Therefore, no monitoring is considered necessary for vehicular or marine traffic emissions.
14.11.2 Noise Impact
14.11.2.1 Construction Phase
Residual airborne noise impact is predicted during the construction phase. To ensure that the nearby NSRs will not be subject to unacceptable construction noise impact, an Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) is recommended. Details on the noise monitoring requirements, methodology and action plans would be described in a separate EM&A Manual.
14.11.2.2 Operation Phase
With implementation of the proposed
mitigation measures, no adverse traffic noise impacts are anticipated from the operation of the Project, hence no
environmental monitoring and audit is proposed.
Prior to the operation phase of the Project, as part of the design process, commissioning tests should be conducted to ensure the operational noise from the fixed plant within WKCD site would comply with the relevant EIAO-TM noise criteria.
14.11.3 Water Quality
Adverse
water quality impact was not predicted during the construction and operation
phases of the proposed underpass road. Nevertheless, appropriate mitigation
measures are recommended to minimize potential water quality impacts.
Water
quality monitoring is recommended to obtain a robust, defensible database of
baseline information of marine water quality before construction, and thereafter,
to monitor any variation of water quality from the baseline conditions and
exceedances of WQOs at sensitive receivers during construction and to ensure
the recommended mitigation measures are properly implemented.
Regular
audit of the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures during the
construction phase at the work areas should also be undertaken to ensure the
recommended mitigation measures are properly implemented.
Details of the water quality monitoring and audit programme and the Event and Action Plan are provided in the stand-alone EM&A Manual.
14.11.4 Sewage and Sewage Treatment Implication
There are no sewerage and sewage treatment implications associated with the underpass road.
14.11.5 Waste Management Implications
It will be the Contractor’s responsibilities to ensure that all wastes produced during the construction of the Project are handled, stored and disposed of in accordance with good waste management practices and the relevant regulations and requirements. The recommended mitigation measures shall form the basis of the Waste Management Plan to be developed by the Contractor in the construction phase.
During construction phase, regular site inspection
as part of the EM&A procedures should be carried
out to determine if various types of waste are being managed in accordance with
approved procedures and the Waste Management Plan. It should cover different
aspects of waste management including waste generation, storage, recycling,
treatment, transport and disposal.
14.11.6 Land Contamination
As explained above, land remediation is not expected at this stage. Therefore, environmental monitoring in relation to land remediation is not required, unless a need for land remediation is identified during the future site investigation for the TST Fire Station area.
However, during construction phase, environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) is to be carried out in the form of regular site inspection. All related procedures and facilities for handling or storage of chemicals and chemical wastes will be audited regularly to make sure they are in order and intact and reported in the EM&A reports as such.
14.11.7 Ecology Impact
The implementation of good site practices
would avoid and minimize any ecological impacts to an acceptable level. No
specific ecological monitoring programme is thus required for the underpass
road.
14.11.8 Landscape and Visual Impact
In addition to
ensure the effective implementation of mitigation measure recommended in Section 14.10.6 and compliance with
relevant environment standards; systematic procedures for monitoring, auditing
and minimizing the environmental impacts associated with construction and
operation phase is required.
During the construction and operation phase, monitoring programme are required to ensure that Contractors and Operators properly carry out mitigation measures and evaluate the actual impact on landscape and visual amenity. This should be undertaken by a Registered Landscape Architect (RLA), or capable person, as landscape auditor. Corrective actions should be undertaken if there are unacceptable adverse impacts.
14.12.1 Air Quality Impact
14.12.1.1 Construction Phase
With
implementation of the recommended mitigation measures as well as the relevant
control requirements as stipulated in the Air
Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation and EPD’s Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means
for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant) BPM 3/2(93), it has been
assessed that there would neither be exceedance of the hourly TSP limit under the Tier 2 mitigated
scenario nor exceedance of the AQO for daily TSP under the Tier 1 mitigated scenario at any of the ASRs throughout
the entire construction period. For
annual TSP results, no exceedance of the corresponding AQO was predicted at any
of the ASRs during the construction phase provided the recommended mitigation
measures are in place.
14.12.1.2 Operation Phase
Majority of the vehicular emission sources
and all marine emission sources are due to respectively the nearby current/planned
road networks serving the
According to the
modelling results, all the identified ASRs would be in compliance with the
corresponding AQO for hourly, daily and annual SO2; for hourly,
daily and annual NO2 as well as for daily and annual RSP. However, during the worst case year of 2015, four
existing ASRs, namely, WOB-1, VT1-23, SRT-1 and SRT-2, would be subject to
exceedance of the AQO for hourly NO2 (i.e., 300 μg/m3) by about 3.7-14.9 μg/m3 (or about 1.2%-5.0%
of the relevant AQO) for once a year, and two planned ASRs, namely, P09-1 and P37-1, would be
subject to marginal exceedance of the AQO for daily NO2 (i.e., 150 μg/m3) by about 0.2-0.3
μg/m3 (or about 0.1%-0.2%
of the relevant AQO) for once a year. Since
the numbers of such hourly and daily NO2 exceedances are within the respective
allowable numbers of exceedances (3 times per year for hourly NO2
and once per year for daily NO2), the AQO for hourly and daily NO2
would still be complied with at the six ASRs.
In conclusion, no adverse air quality
impacts due to vehicular or marine traffic emissions are anticipated during the
operation phase.
14.12.2 Noise Impact
14.12.2.1 Construction Phase
The construction phase noise impact
assessment has been made based on the best available information, taking into
account other expected concurrent projects. Having exhausted practicable mitigation
measures in the form of quiet plant, movable noise barrier, enclosure and insulting
fabric, the construction noise levels at most of the representative NSRs are
predicted to comply with the noise standards stipulated in the Technical
Memorandum on Environmental
Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM).
The cumulative construction noise
impact predicted at one existing residential development at Austin Road
West would exceed the relevant noise criterion by 1 dB(A) for a duration of 1
month. The exceedance was identified as dominantly contributed by the concurrent Express Rail Link (XRL)
and Road Works at West Kowloon (RWWK) projects and the noise from this Project
is only 66 dB(A). Residual construction noise impacts are also predicted at two representative NSRs of educational use
at
14.12.2.2 Operation Phase
The potential road traffic noise impacts have been assessed based on the peak traffic flows in 2032. The exceedances were identified as dominantly contributed by the surrounding existing roads and the committed RWWK project road sections. The predicted noise contributions from the proposed roads of this Project are less than 1.0 dB(A) at those affected NSRs and the road traffic noise levels of the proposed roads are all below the relevant noise criteria. Direct noise mitigation measures on the Project road sections are deemed not necessary as they would be ineffective in improving the noise environment at the sensitive receivers. No adverse noise impacts arising from the proposed underpass are predicted at any of the representative NSRs.
Noise impact from the planned fixed plants could be effectively mitigated by implementing noise control measures at sources during the detailed design stage. With the adoption of the proposed maximum allowable Sound Power Levels (SWLs) of the proposed fixed plant, the impact noise levels at all selected NSRs would comply with the relevant noise criteria for the daytime, evening time and night time periods. Therefore, significant fixed plant noise impact to the existing NSRs is not anticipated.
14.12.3 Water Quality Impact
14.12.3.1 Construction Phase
The key issue in terms of water quality during the construction phase of the underpass road would be the potential for release of wastewater into coastal waters from construction site runoff and drainage.
Deterioration in water quality could be minimised to acceptable levels through implementing adequate mitigation measures such as control measures on suspended solids release, on-site runoff and drainage from the works areas to minimise suspended solids spillage and construction runoff prior to discharge. Proper site management and good housekeeping practices would also be required to ensure that construction wastes and other construction-related materials would not enter the public drainage system and coastal waters. Sewage effluent arising from the construction workforce would also be handled through provision of portable toilets.
With the implementation of these recommended mitigation measures, no unacceptable impacts on water quality from the construction works for the underpass road are anticipated. Water quality monitoring and site inspections during construction phase should be undertaken routinely to inspect the construction activities and works areas to ensure the recommended mitigation measures are properly implemented.
14.12.3.2 Operation Phase
Surface runoff from the proposed
underpass road may be contaminated by oils leaked from passing vehicles.
It is considered that impacts upon water quality will be acceptable provided
that the proposed underpass road is designed with adequate drainage systems and
appropriate oil interceptors, as required
14.12.4 Sewage and Sewage Treatment
Implication
There are no sewerage and sewage treatment implications associated with the underpass road.
14.12.5 Waste Management Implication
14.12.5.1 Construction Phase
The major waste types generated by the construction activities will include inert C&D materials from excavation works for the basement (including the underpass road and the flyover) as well as from construction of superstructures and substructures; C&D materials from general site clearance; chemical waste from maintenance and servicing of construction plant and equipment; and general refuse from the workforce. Provided that all these identified wastes are handled, transported and disposed of in strict accordance with the relevant legislative and recommended requirements and that the recommended good site practices and mitigation measures are properly implemented, no adverse environmental impact is expected during the construction phase.
14.12.5.2 Operation Phase
During operation phase, this underpass road project will not involve any waste generating activities. Therefore, no adverse waste management impact is anticipated during operation phase, and no mitigation measures are required.
14.12.6 Land Contamination
The land contamination assessment has been conducted by reviewing historical/current land uses, desktop review and site surveys with respect to the potential land contamination at the Project area. Other relevant information was also collected from the related Government Departments.
Based on the findings of the site surveys on the existing and historical land uses in the Project area and review of relevant records and reports, adverse land contamination impacts associated with the construction and operation of the Project is not anticipated except for demolition of the two underground fuel oil storage tanks and associated pipes at the existing TST Fire Station within the WKCD site. As the existing TST Fire Station will remain in operation until its relocation in phases, which will unlikely be started before 2020, it is proposed to carry out further site investigation after obtaining access to the Fire Station but prior to demolition of the underground fuel oil tanks and associated pipes in order to obtain up-to–date site investigation findings for assessment of land contamination that may occur between now and its future relocation. The site investigation findings should be documented in a CAR and where necessary a RAP should also be prepared for submission to EPD for approval.
Mitigation measures for handling of contaminated materials, in case it is discovered after commencement of the works, and regular site audits are recommended to minimize the potential adverse impacts on workers’ health and safety and disposal of any potentially contaminated materials.
14.12.7 Ecology Impact
The findings from the field survey and
desktop review indicated that the major terrestrial habitats in the Study Area
are developed area, open field and plantation, with small amount of sloping
seawall along the coastline. All these habitats are with low vegetation cover,
short planting history and of low to very low ecological value. Therefore,
direct ecological impact on loss of habitat is considered to be of
insignificant. The indirect disturbance impact to offsite habitat is considered
to be of insignificant in both construction and operation phases, since the proposed
underpass road is surrounded by urbanized area. The plantation and landscape
planting included in the development plan would have potential positive
contribution to the local.
14.12.8 Landscape and Visual Impact
The
WKCD is to be developed into a world-class integrated arts and cultural
district to enrich the arts and cultural life for the people in
There
are 38 LRs, 14 LCAs and 23 representative VSRs identified within the assessment area that
may be affected by underpass road.
There will be slight adverse to moderate adverse impacts
on some LRs, LCAs and VSRs at close proximity to the site during construction
phase. However, impacts during construction phase are temporary only. Impacts on the landscape resources are considered
to be minimal during operation phase since it is located underground.
The ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road will be integrated with the WKCD buildings and will no longer be visible as individual structures upon completion of the entire WKCD development, hence they will not be visually prominent and thus it is anticipated that the visual impacts during operation (year 10) phase is slight.
As the underpass road is mostly located underground, the overall residual landscape and visual impacts associated with the construction and operation phases of the underpass road are anticipated to be acceptable with the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures and in the long term beneficial.
The
implementation schedule for the mitigation measures to be implemented under
this Project is presented in Table
14.13.1.
Table 14.13.1: Implementation Schedule
|
|
|
|
|
Implementation Stage1 |
|
||||||||||
EIA Ref. |
EM&A Ref. |
Environmental Protection Measures |
Location / Duration of measures / Timing of completion of measures |
Implementation Agent |
Des |
Con |
Op |
Dec |
Relevant Legislation & Guidelines |
|||||||
Air Quality Impact (Construction) |
||||||||||||||||
14.3.6.1 |
|
General Dust Control Measures Frequent water spraying for active construction areas (12 times a day or once every one hour), including Heavy construction activities such as construction of buildings or roads, drilling, ground excavation, cut and fill operations (i.e., earth moving) |
Within WKCD site / Duration of the construction phase / Prior to commencement of operation |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
EIA Recommendation and Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation |
|||||||
14.3.6.1 |
|
Best Practice For Dust Control The relevant best
practices for dust control as stipulated in the Air Pollution Control
(construction Dust) Regulation should be adopted to further reduce the
construction dust impacts from the Project. These best practices include: Good Site
Management ¡ Good
site management is important to help reducing potential air quality impact
down to an acceptable level. As a general guide, the Contractor should
maintain high standard of housekeeping to prevent emission of fugitive dust.
Loading, unloading, handling and storage of raw materials, wastes or
by-products should be carried out in a manner so as to minimise the release
of visible dust emission. Any piles of materials accumulated on or around the
work areas should be cleaned up regularly. Cleaning, repair and maintenance
of all plant facilities within the work areas should be carried out in a
manner minimising generation of fugitive dust emissions. The material should
be handled properly to prevent fugitive dust emission before cleaning. Disturbed
Parts of the Roads ¡ Each
and every main temporary access should be paved with concrete, bituminous
hardcore materials or metal plates and kept clear of dusty materials; or ¡ Unpaved
parts of the road should be sprayed with water or a dust suppression chemical
so as to keep the entire road surface wet. Exposed Earth ¡ Exposed
earth should be properly treated by compaction, hydroseeding, vegetation
planting or seating with latex, vinyl, bitumen within six months after the
last construction activity on the site or part of the site where the exposed
earth lies. Loading,
Unloading or Transfer of Dusty Materials ¡ All
dusty materials should be sprayed with water immediately prior to any loading
or transfer operation so as to keep the dusty material wet. Debris
Handling ¡ Any
debris should be covered entirely by impervious sheeting or stored in a
debris collection area sheltered on the top and the three sides. ¡ Before
debris is dumped into a chute, water should be sprayed so that it remains wet
when it is dumped. Transport of
Dusty Materials ¡ Vehicle
used for transporting dusty materials/spoils should be covered with tarpaulin
or similar material. The cover should extend over the edges of the sides and
tailboards. Wheel washing
¡ Vehicle
wheel washing facilities should be provided at each construction site exit.
Immediately before leaving the construction site, every vehicle should be
washed to remove any dusty materials from its body and wheels. Use of
vehicles ¡ The
speed of the trucks within the site should be controlled to about 10km/hour
in order to reduce adverse dust impacts and secure the safe movement around
the site. ¡ Immediately
before leaving the construction site, every vehicle should be washed to
remove any dusty materials from its body and wheels. ¡ Where
a vehicle leaving the construction site is carrying a load of dusty
materials, the load should be covered entirely by clean impervious sheeting
to ensure that the dusty materials do not leak from the vehicle. Site hoarding ¡ Where a site boundary adjoins a road, street, service lane or other area accessible to the public, hoarding of not less than 2.4m high from ground level should be provided along the entire length of that portion of the site boundary except for a site entrance or exit. |
Within WKCD site / Duration of the construction phase / Prior to commencement of operation |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
EIA Recommendation and Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation |
|||||||
14.3.6.1 |
|
Best
Practicable Means for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant) The relevant best practices for dust control as stipulated in the Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant) BPM 3/2(93) should be followed and implemented to further reduce the construction dust impacts of the Project. These best practices include: Exhaust from
Dust Arrestment Plant ¡
Wherever possible the final discharge point from particulate matter
arrestment plant, where is not necessary to achieve dispersion from residual
pollutants, should be at low level to minimise the effect on the local
community in the case of abnormal emissions and to facilitate maintenance and
inspection Emission
Limits ¡
All emissions to air, other than steam or water vapour, shall be
colourless and free from persistent mist or smoke Engineering
Design/Technical Requirements ¡ As
a general guidance, the loading, unloading, handling and storage of fuel, raw
materials, products, wastes or by-products should be carried out in a manner
so as to prevent the release of visible dust and/or other noxious or offensive
emissions |
Within WKCD site / Duration of the construction phase / Prior to commencement of operation |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
EIA recommendation; Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant) BPM 3/2(93) |
|||||||
Air Quality Impact (Operation) |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
No mitigation measure is required. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Noise Impact (Construction) |
||||||||||||||||
14.4.7.1 |
|
Good Site Practice Good site practice and noise management can
significantly reduce the impact of construction site activities on nearby
NSRs. The following package of measures should be followed during each phase
of construction: ¡ only
well-maintained plant to be operated on-site and plant should be serviced
regularly during the construction works; ¡ machines
and plant that may be in intermittent use to be shut down between work
periods or should be throttled down to a minimum; ¡ plant
known to emit noise strongly in one direction, should, where possible, be
orientated to direct noise away from the NSRs; ¡ mobile
plant should be sited as far away from NSRs as possible; and ¡ material
stockpiles and other structures to be effectively utilised, where
practicable, to screen noise from on-site construction activities. |
Within WKCD site / During construction phase / Prior to commencement of operation |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
EIAO and Noise Control Ordinance |
|||||||
14.4.7.1 |
|
Adoption of Quieter PME The recommended
quieter PME adopted in the assessment were taken from EPD’s QPME
Inventory and “Sound Power Levels of
Other Commonly Used PME”. It should be noted that the silenced PME selected for assessment can
be found in |
Within WKCD site / During construction phase / Prior to commencement of operation |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
EIAO and Noise Control Ordinance |
|||||||
14.4.7.1 |
|
Use of Movable Noise Barriers Movable noise barriers can be very effective
in screening noise from particular items of plant when constructing the
Project. Noise barriers located along the active works area close to the
noise generating component of a PME could produce at least 10 dB(A) screening
for stationary plant and 5 dB(A) for mobile plant provided the direct line of
sight between the PME and the NSRs is blocked. |
Within WKCD site / During construction phase / Prior to commencement of operation |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
EIAO and Noise Control Ordinance |
|||||||
14.4.7.1 |
|
Use of Noise Enclosure/ Acoustic Shed The use of noise enclosure or acoustic shed
is to cover stationary PME such as air compressor and concrete pump. With the
adoption of the noise enclosure, the PME could be completely screened, and
noise reduction of 15 dB(A) can be achieved
according to the EIAO Guidance Note No.9/2010. |
Within WKCD site / During construction phase / Prior to commencement of operation |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
EIAO and Noise Control Ordinance |
|||||||
14.4.7.1 |
|
Use of Noise Insulating Fabric Noise insulating fabric can also be adopted
for certain PME (e.g. drill rig, pilling machine etc). The fabric should be
lapped such that there are no openings or gaps on the joints. According to
the approved Tsim Sha Tsui Station Northern Subway EIA report
(AEIAR-127/2008), a noise reduction of 10 dB(A) can
be achieved for the PME lapped with the noise insulating fabric. |
Within WKCD site / During construction phase / Prior to commencement of operation |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
EIAO and Noise Control Ordinance |
|||||||
14.4.7.1 |
|
Scheduling of Construction Works outside School Examination Periods During construction phase, the contractor
should liaise with the educational institutions (including NSRs LCS and
CRGPS) to obtain the examination schedule and avoid the noisy. |
Within WKCD site / During construction phase / Prior to commencement of operation |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
EIAO and Noise Control Ordinance |
|||||||
Noise Impact (Operation) |
||||||||||||||||
14.4.7.2 |
|
Road
Traffic Noise Sound-absorbing materials should be
installed on inner walls and ceilings of the underpass at the portals at the
junction of Lin Cheung Road and Austin Road West, interim access of Austin
Road West and permanent access at Canton Road. The sound-absorbing materials
would be extended at least 30m into the underpass at the portals. |
Portal at the junction of Lin Cheung Road and Austin Road West, Interim Access at Austin Road West and Permanent access at Canton Road / Before commencement of operation of road project |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA / Highways Department |
P |
P |
P |
|
EIAO |
|||||||
14.4.7.2 |
|
Fixed Plant Noise Specification of
the maximum allowable sound power levels of the proposed fixed plants during
daytime and night-time should be followed. The following noise reduction measures
shall be considered as far as practicable during operation: ¡ Choose
quieter plant such as those which have been effectively silenced; ¡ Include
noise levels specification when ordering new plant (including chillier and
E/M equipment); ¡ Locate
fixed plant/louvre away from any NSRs as far as practicable; ¡ Locate
fixed plant in walled plant rooms or in specially designed enclosures; ¡ Locate
noisy machines in a basement or a completely separate building; ¡ Install
direct noise mitigation measures including silencers, acoustic louvres and
acoustic enclosure where necessary; and ¡ Develop and implement a regularly scheduled plant maintenance programme so that equipment is properly operated and serviced in order to maintain a controlled level of noise. |
Within WKCD site / During operation phase / Throughout operation phase |
Design Architect / Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
P |
|
P |
|
EIAO and Noise Control Ordinance |
|||||||
Water Quality Impact (Construction) |
||||||||||||||||
14.5.5.1 |
|
Construction site runoff and drainage The site practices outlined in ProPECC Note PN 1/94 should be followed as far as practicable in order to minimise surface runoff and the chance of erosion. The following measures are recommended to protect water quality and sensitive uses of the coastal area, and when properly implemented should be sufficient to adequately control site discharges so as to avoid water quality impacts: ¡ At
the start of site establishment, perimeter cut-off drains to direct off-site
water around the site should be constructed with internal drainage works and
erosion and sedimentation control facilities implemented. Channels, earth
bunds or sand bag barriers should be provided on site to direct storm water
to silt removal facilities. The design of the temporary on-site drainage
system should be undertaken by the WKCDA’s Contractor prior to the
commencement of construction; ¡ Sand/silt
removal facilities such as sand/silt traps and sediment basins should be
provided to remove sand/silt particles from runoff to meet the requirements
of the TM standards under the WPCO.
The design of efficient silt removal facilities should be based on the
guidelines in Appendix A1 of ProPECC Note PN 1/94. Sizes may vary depending upon the flow
rate. The detailed design of the sand/silt traps should be undertaken by the
WKCDA’s Contractor prior to the commencement of construction. ¡ All
drainage facilities and erosion and sediment control structures should be
regularly inspected and maintained to ensure proper and efficient operation
at all times and particularly during rainstorms. Deposited silt and grit
should be regularly removed, at the onset of and after each rainstorm to
ensure that these facilities are functioning properly at all times. ¡ Measures
should be taken to minimize the ingress of site drainage into excavations. If
excavation of trenches in wet periods is necessary, they should be dug and
backfilled in short sections wherever practicable. Water pumped out from
foundation excavations should be discharged into storm drains via silt
removal facilities. ¡ All
vehicles and plant should be cleaned before leaving a construction site to
ensure no earth, mud, debris and the like is deposited by them on roads. An
adequately designed and sited wheel washing facility should be provided at construction
site exit where practicable. Wash-water should have sand and silt settled out
and removed regularly to ensure the continued efficiency of the process. The
section of access road leading to, and exiting from, the wheel-wash bay to
the public road should be paved with sufficient backfall toward the wheel-wash
bay to prevent vehicle tracking of soil and silty water to public roads and
drains. ¡ Open
stockpiles of construction materials or construction wastes on-site should be
covered with tarpaulin or similar fabric during rainstorms. Measures should
be taken to prevent the washing away of construction materials, soil, silt or
debris into any drainage system. ¡ Manholes
(including newly constructed ones) should be adequately covered and
temporarily sealed so as to prevent silt, construction materials or debris
being washed into the drainage system and stormwater runoff being directed
into foul sewers. ¡ Precautions
should be taken at any time of the year when rainstorms are likely. Actions
should be taken when a rainstorm is imminent or forecasted and actions to be
taken during or after rainstorms are summarized in Appendix A2 of ProPECC
Note PN 1/94. Particular attention
should be paid to the control of silty surface runoff during storm events,
especially for areas located near steep slopes. ¡ Bentonite
slurries used in piling or slurry walling should be reconditioned and reused
wherever practicable. Temporary enclosed storage locations should be provided
on-site for any unused bentonite that needs to be transported away after all
the related construction activities are completed. The requirements in
ProPECC Note PN 1/94 should be adhered to in the handling and disposal of
bentonite slurries. |
Within WKCD site / Duration of the construction phase / Prior to commencement of operation |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
ProPECC Note PN 1/94 |
|||||||
14.5.5.1 |
|
Barging facilities and activities Recommendations for good site practices
during operation of the proposed barging point include: ¡ All
vessels should be sized so that adequate clearance is maintained between
vessels and the seabed in all tide conditions, to ensure that undue turbidity
is not generated by turbulence from vessel movement or propeller wash; ¡ Loading
of barges and hoppers should be controlled to prevent splashing of material
into the surrounding water. Barges or
hoppers should not be filled to a level that will cause the overflow of
materials or polluted water during loading or transportation; ¡ All
hopper barges should be fitted with tight fitting seals to their bottom
openings to prevent leakage of material; and ¡ Construction
activities should not cause foam, oil, grease, scum, litter or other
objectionable matter to be present on the water within the site. |
Within WKCD site / During construction phase / Prior to commencement of operation |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
WPCO |
|||||||
14.5.5.1 |
|
Sewage
effluent from construction workforce Temporary sanitary facilities, such as
portable chemical toilets, should be employed on-site where necessary to
handle sewage from the workforce. A licensed contractor should be employed to
provide appropriate and adequate portable toilets and be responsible for
appropriate disposal and maintenance. |
Within WKCD site / During construction phase / Prior to commencement of operation |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
ProPECC Note PN 1/94 |
|||||||
14.5.5.1 |
|
General
construction activities Construction
solid waste, debris and refuse generated on-site should be collected, handled
and disposed of properly to avoid entering any nearby storm water drain.
Stockpiles of cement and other construction materials should be kept covered
when not being used. Oils and fuels should only be stored in
designated areas which have pollution prevention facilities. To prevent
spillage of fuels and solvents to any nearby storm water drain, all fuel
tanks and storage areas should be provided with locks and be sited on sealed
areas, within bunds of a capacity equal to 110% of the storage capacity of
the largest tank. The bund should be drained of rainwater after a rain event. |
Within WKCD site / During construction phase / Prior to commencement of operation |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
ProPECC Note PN 1/94 |
|||||||
Water Quality Impact (Operation) |
||||||||||||||||
14.5.5.2 |
|
Road and surface runoff For operation of the proposed WKCD development and associated local road network, a surface water drainage system would be provided to collect road and surface runoff. It is recommended that the road drainage should be provided with adequately designed silt trap and oil interceptors, as necessary. The design of the operation stage mitigation measures for the proposed WKCD development and associated local road network should take into account the guidelines published in the Practice Note for Professional Persons on Drainage Plans Subject to Comment by the Environmental Protection Department (ProPECC Note PN 5/93) and Highways Department Guidance Notes RD/GN/035 – Road Pavement Drainage Design. |
Within WKCD site / During operation phase / Throughout operation phase |
HyD (for exclusive road drains) |
|
|
P |
|
ProPECC Note PN 5/93, Highways Department Guidance Notes RD/GN/035 |
|||||||
Sewerage and Sewage Treatment
Implications (Design) |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
No mitigation measure is required. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Sewerage and Sewage Treatment
Implications (Operation) |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
No mitigation measure is required. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Waste Management Implications
(Construction) |
||||||||||||||||
14.7.4.1 |
|
Good
Site Practices Recommendations
for good site practices during the construction activities include: ¡
Nomination of an
approved person, such as a site manager, to be responsible for good site
practices, arrangements for collection and effective disposal to an
appropriate facility, of all wastes generated at the site ¡
Training of site
personnel in proper waste management and chemical handling procedures ¡
Provision of
sufficient waste disposal points and regular collection of waste ¡
Appropriate
measures to minimise windblown litter and dust/odour during transportation of
waste by either covering trucks or by transporting wastes in enclosed
containers ¡
Provision of wheel
washing facilities before the trucks leaving the works area so as to minimise
dust introduction to public roads ¡
Well planned
delivery programme for offsite disposal such that adverse environmental impact from
transporting the inert or non-inert C&D materials is not anticipated |
WKCD construction site / Throughout construction stage / Until completion of all construction activities |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
Waste Disposal Ordinance; Waste Disposal (Chemical Wastes) (General) Regulation; and Technical Circular (Works) No. 19/2005 Environmental Management on Construction Site |
|||||||
14.7.4.1 |
|
Waste
Reduction Measures Recommendations
to achieve waste reduction include: ¡
Sort inert C&D
materials to recover any recyclable portions such as metals ¡
Segregation and
storage of different types of waste in different containers or
skips to enhance reuse or recycling of materials and their proper disposal ¡
Encourage
collection of recyclable waste such as waste paper and aluminium cans by
providing separate labelled bins to enable such waste to be segregated from
other general refuse generated by the work force ¡
Proper site
practices to minimise the potential for damage or contamination of inert C&D
materials ¡
Plan the use of
construction materials carefully to minimise amount of waste generated and
avoid unnecessary generation of waste |
WKCD construction site / Throughout construction stage / Until completion of all construction activities |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
Waste Disposal Ordinance |
|||||||
14.7.4.1 |
|
Inert and Non-inert C&D Materials In
order to minimise impacts resulting from collection and transportation of inert
C&D materials for off-site disposal, the excavated materials should be
reused on-site as fill material as far as
practicable. In addition, inert C&D materials generated from excavation works
could be reused as fill materials in local projects that require public fill for
reclamation. ¡
The surplus inert C&D
materials will be disposed of at the Government’s PFRFs for beneficial use by
other projects in ¡
Liaison
with the CEDD Public Fill Committee (PFC) on the allocation of space for
disposal of the inert C&D materials at PFRF is underway. No construction work is allowed to proceed
until all issues on management of inert C&D materials have been resolved
and all relevant arrangements have been endorsed by the relevant authorities
including PFC and EPD. ¡
The C&D materials
generated from general site clearance should be sorted on site to segregate
any inert materials for reuse or disposal of at PFRFs whereas the non-inert
materials will be disposed of at the designated landfill site. ¡
In order to monitor
the disposal of inert and non-inert C&D materials at respectively PFRFs
and the designated landfill site, and to control fly-tipping, it is
recommended that the Contractor should follow the Technical Circular (Works)
No.6/2010 for Trip Ticket System for Disposal of Construction &
Demolition Materials issued by Development Bureau. In addition, it is also recommended that
the Contractor should prepare and implement a Waste Management Plan detailing
their various waste arising and waste management practices in accordance with
the relevant requirements of the Technical Circular (Works) No. 19/2005
Environmental Management on Construction Site. |
WKCD construction site / Throughout construction stage / Until completion of all construction activities |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
Waste Disposal Ordinance ; Technical Circular (Works) No.6/2010 for Trip Ticket System for Disposal of Construction & Demolition Materials; and Technical Circular (Works) No. 19/2005 Environmental Management on Construction Site |
|||||||
14.7.4.1 |
|
Chemical
Waste If
chemical wastes are produced at the construction site, the Contractor will be required to register with the EPD as a chemical
waste producer and to follow the guidelines stated in the “Code of Practice on the
Packaging Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes”. Good quality containers compatible with the
chemical wastes should be used, and incompatible chemicals should be stored
separately. Appropriate labels should be securely attached on each chemical
waste container indicating the corresponding chemical characteristics of the
chemical waste, such as explosive, flammable, oxidizing, irritant, toxic,
harmful, corrosive, etc. The Contractor should use a licensed collector to
transport and dispose of the chemical wastes at the approved Chemical Waste
Treatment Centre or other licensed recycling facilities, in accordance with
the Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation. Potential environmental impacts arising from the handling activities (including
storage, collection, transportation and disposal of chemical waste) are
expected to be minimal with the implementation of appropriate
mitigation measures as recommended. |
WKCD construction site / Throughout construction stage / Until completion of all construction activities |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
Code of Practice on the Packaging Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes; Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation |
|||||||
14.7.4.1 |
|
General
Refuse General refuse should be stored in enclosed
bins or compaction units separated from inert C&D materials. A reputable
waste collector should be employed by the Contractor to remove general refuse from the site, separately from inert
C&D materials. Preferably an enclosed and covered area should be provided
to reduce the occurrence of 'wind blown' light material. |
WKCD construction site / Throughout construction stage / Until completion of all construction activities |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
Waste Disposal Ordinance and Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance - Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances Regulation |
|||||||
Waste Management Implications (Operation) |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
No mitigation measure is required. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Land Contamination (Construction) |
||||||||||||||||
14.8.5 |
|
The
potential for land contamination issues at the TST Fire Station due to its future relocation will be confirmed by site investigation after land
acquisition. Where necessary, mitigation measures for minimising potential
exposure to contaminated materials (if any) or remediation measures will be
identified. If contaminated land is identified (e.g., during decommissioning
of fuel oil storage tanks) after the commencement of works, mitigation
measures are proposed in order to minimise the potentially adverse effects on
the health and safety of construction workers and impacts arising from the
disposal of potentially contaminated materials. The
following measures are proposed for excavation and transportation of
contaminated material: ¡
To minimize the
chance for construction workers to come into contact with any contaminated
materials, bulk earth-moving excavation equipment should be employed; ¡
Contact with
contaminated materials can be minimised by wearing appropriate clothing and
personal protective equipment such as gloves and masks (especially when
interacting directly with contaminated material), provision of washing
facilities and prohibition of smoking and eating on site; ¡
Stockpiling of
contaminated excavated materials on site should be avoided as far as possible; ¡
The use of
contaminated soil for landscaping purpose should be avoided unless
pre-treatment was carried out; ¡
Vehicles containing
any contaminated excavated materials should be suitably covered to reduce
dust emissions and/or release of contaminated wastewater; ¡
Truck bodies and
tailgates should be sealed to stop any discharge; ¡
Only licensed waste
haulers should be used to collect and transport contaminated material to
treatment/disposal site and should be equipped with tracking system to avoid fly tipping; ¡
Speed control for
trucks carrying contaminated materials should be exercised; ¡
Observe all
relevant regulations in relation to waste handling, such as Waste Disposal
Ordinance (Cap 354), Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation
(Cap 354) and obtain all necessary permits where required; and ¡
Maintain records of
waste generation and disposal quantities and disposal arrangements. |
Site of the existing Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station / During excavation activities / Prior to construction of WKCD facilities |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
ü |
|
|
Waste Disposal Ordinance; and Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation |
|||||||
Land Contamination (Operation) |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
No mitigation measure is required. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Ecological Impact (Construction) |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
No mitigation measure is required. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Ecological Impact (Operation) |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
No mitigation measure is required. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Landscape and Visual Impact
(Construction) |
||||||||||||||||
(CM1) |
|
Trees should be retained in situ on site as far as possible. Should tree removal be unavoidable due to construction impacts, trees will be transplanted or felled with reference to the stated criteria in the Tree Removal Applications to be submitted to relevant government departments for approval in accordance to ETWB TCW No. 29/2004 and 3/2006. |
WKCD construction site / Throughout construction stage / Until completion of all construction activities |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
P |
P |
|
|
ETWB TCW No. 29/2004 and 3/2006 |
|||||||
(CM2) |
|
Compensatory tree planting shall be incorporated to the proposed project and maximize the new tree, shrubs and other vegetation planting to compensate tree felled and vegetation removed. Also, implementation of compensatory planting should be of a ratio not less than 1:1 in terms of quality and quantity within the site. |
|
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
P |
P |
|
|
ETWB TCW No. 3/2006 |
|||||||
(CM3) |
|
Buffer trees for screening purposes to soften the hard architectural and engineering structures and facilities. |
Alongside superstructures within WKCD / After completion of superstructure construction / Prior to operation stage |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
P |
P |
|
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
Table 14.10.17 (CM4) |
|
Softscape treatments such as vertical green wall panel / planting of climbing and/or weeping plants, etc, to maximize the green coverage and soften the hard architectural and engineering structures and facilities. |
Alongside superstructures within WKCD / After completion of superstructure construction / Prior to operation stage |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
P |
P |
|
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
Table 14.10.17 (CM5) |
|
Roof greening by means of intensive and extensive green roof to maximize the green coverage and improve aesthetic appeal and visual quality of the building/structure. |
Alongside superstructures within WKCD / After completion of superstructure construction / Prior to operation stage |
Design Consultant / Contractor
appointed by WKCDA |
P |
P |
|
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
Table 14.10.17 (CM6) |
|
Sensitive streetscape design should be incorporated along all new roads and streets. |
Alongside superstructures within WKCD / After completion of superstructure construction / Prior to operation stage |
Design Consultant / Contractor
appointed by WKCDA |
P |
P |
|
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
(CM7) |
|
Structure, ornamental planting shall be provided along amenity strips to enhance the landscape quality. |
Alongside superstructures within WKCD / After completion of superstructure construction / Prior to operation stage |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
P |
P |
|
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
(CM8) |
|
Landscape design shall be incorporated to architectural and engineering structures in order to provide aesthetically pleasing designs. |
Alongside superstructures within WKCD / After completion of superstructure construction / Prior to operation stage |
Design Consultant / Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
P |
P |
|
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
(MMC1) |
|
Use of decorative screen hoarding/boards |
WKCD construction sites / Throughout construction stage / Prior to operation stage |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
ETWB TCW No. 3/2006 |
|||||||
(MMC2) |
|
During the transition period, the temporary ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road will adopt light colour |
WKCD basement construction sites / After completion of ventilation shaft superstructure / Prior to operation stage |
Design Architect / Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
P |
P |
|
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
(MMC3) |
|
The early introduction of landscape treatments |
WKCD construction sites / Towards the end of construction stage / Prior to operation stage |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
(MMC4) |
|
The temporary landscape areas will help achieve the visual balance and reduce the visual impacts derived by the construction activities within the site. |
Temporary landscape areas/ Throughout construction stage / Prior to operation stage |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
(MMC5) |
|
Control of night time lighting such as avoidance of lighting from spilling onto nearby residential developments. |
WKCD construction sites / During night time / Throughout construction stage |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
P |
|
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
Landscape and Visual Impact (Operation) |
||||||||||||||||
(OM1) |
|
Provide proper planting establishment works, including watering, pruning, weeding, pest control, replacement of dead plant, etc, |
WKCD open areas / Throughout operation phase / As-needed basis |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
|
P |
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
(OM2) |
|
Provision of open space in various forms and at different levels on
or above ground, including park, waterfront promenade, piazzas and terrace
garden and associated green connection for public enjoyment. |
WKCD open areas / Throughout operation phase / As-needed basis |
Design Consultant / Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
P |
|
P |
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
(MMO1) |
|
The temporary ventilation shafts associated with the underpass road
will adopt light colour during operation phase (day 1). |
WKCD buildings / During design stage / Prior to operation stage (year 10) |
Design Architect / Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
P |
|
P |
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
(MMO2) |
|
The temporary landscaped areas with planters will help achieve the
visual balance during operation phase (day 1). |
Temporary landscaped areas / Throughout construction stage / Prior to operation stage (year 10) |
Design Architect / Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
|
P |
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
(MMO3) |
|
Planters and other softscape treatments
during operation phase (day 1). |
WKCD construction sites / Prior to operation stage (year 10) |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
|
P |
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
(MMO4) |
|
Use of decorative screen hoarding/boards during operation phase (day 1) . |
WKCD construction sites / Prior to operation stage (year 10) |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
|
P |
|
ETWB TCW No. 3/2006 |
|||||||
(MMO5) |
|
Aesthetic design
of roads and roadside planting during operation phase (year 10) |
Areas close to the entrance of the
underground road / Throughout operation stage |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
|
P |
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
(MMO6) |
|
Control of night time lighting such as
avoidance of lighting from spilling onto nearby residential developments
during operation phase (day 1 and year 10) |
WKCD building exterior and open areas / During night time / Throughout operation stage |
Contractor appointed by WKCDA |
|
|
P |
|
EIAO-TM |
|||||||
1 Des = Design; Con = Construction; Op = Operation; Dec
= Decommission