|
Contents |
Chapter Title
|
14.2 Summary of
Environmental Outcomes 14.3 Summary of
Environmental Impacts 14.4 Key
Assessment Assumptions, Limitations of Assessment Methodologies and Prior
Agreements |
Table
14.1:_ Summary
of Environmental Impacts
In accordance with the EIA Study Brief (No. ESB-261/2013) issued under the EIAO for this Project, an assessment of the potential environmental impacts associated with construction and operation of the Project has been conducted based on the information available at this stage. Environmental issues covered in this EIA include:
§ Air Quality Impact
§ Hazard to Life
§ Noise Impact
§ Water Quality Impact
§ Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Implication
§ Waste Management Implication
§ Land Contamination
§ Ecological Impact (Terrestrial and Marine/Aquatic)
§ Fisheries Impact
§ Landscape and Visual Impact
The findings of this EIA study has determined the likely nature and extent of environmental impacts and identified environmental control measures for incorporation into the planning and design of the proposed Project to ensure compliance with environmental legislation and standards during construction and operation phases. The implementation schedule for the recommended mitigation measures are presented in Chapter 15.
The EIA study for the Project has predicted that with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, the Project would be environmentally acceptable to the surrounding population and environmental sensitive receivers. The key environmental outcomes arising from the EIA study and the implementation of environmental control measures of the Project are summarised in the following sections.
TSW, Project area of the proposed Project, is located to the western side of Brick Hill southwest of the Lowland and facing the Aberdeen Channel, distant from the populated area. Despite this, avoidance and/or minimisation of environmental impacts due to the Project was a key consideration at the early stages of Project development. As a result of early detection and optimisation of the Project, the following populations have been protected from adverse impacts:
§ Residences of Larvotto – protected from adverse visual impacts
§ Residences along Shum Wan Road – protected from adverse air quality and noise impacts
§ Planned hotels at TSW – protected from adverse air quality and visual impacts
§ Schools on Shum Wan Road and Nam Long Shan Road – protected from adverse air quality, noise and visual impacts
§ Visitors and workers at Ocean Park – protected from adverse air quality and noise impacts
§ Visitors, workers and hikers with a view of Ocean Park – protected from adverse visual impacts
§ South China Sea – has been protected by the avoidance of dredging for construction of the optional piers and additional land formation proposed for development of the Project.
The major environmental friendly options considered and incorporated in the preferred option are the blending of the current Project with the surrounding natural environment.
The overall design goal of the Project is to create a dynamic, striking Water Park deeply rooted into the beautiful natural surroundings and local site topography. Unlike traditional water parks, the preferred scheme aims to integrate the indoor, outdoor, entrance plaza, visitor's journey, rides, architecture and structure in a holistic response to the design brief. This scheme now takes good advantage of the existing slope conditions by locating ride platforms on or near the slope to minimise the amount of structure support required. The building forms are an extension of the existing slope topography integrating the Water Park rides and spaces blurring the edges between indoor and outdoor zones as well as maximising views towards the bay. Cascading pools integrated with the natural surroundings are an iconic feature in the preferred scheme.
Avoidance of environmental impact has been taken into account during consideration of alternatives for layout and design. Ecological concern is recognised for the Project, key ecological habitat has been scoped out at the initial stage of the development and due consideration was given for conservation of key ecological resource during the option development stage.
The preferred development option has many benefits from ecological perspective over other alternative options. For instance, in relation to habitat disturbance, the original design places the slides on both northern and southern side of the Project Site affecting the natural habitat in both areas. It spreads the impact on natural habitat at different locations and affects the flora species of conservation concern Artocorpus hypargyrues and Platycodon grandiflorus on the southern side of the Project area. On the contrary, the preferred layout design limits the impact on natural habitat to the northern side only and will enhance the habitat at the southern side of the Project area for ardeid community. The difference between the two different schemes is presented in Figure 2.8 whilst details of the ecological impact assessment are presented in Chapter 10 Ecology Chapter.
It has been recognised that the roosting place of ardeid was mainly concentrated at the Flamingo Pond, therefore preservation of the Flamingo Pond had been considered. However, as the Flamingo Pond is located on the flat area at the centre of the Project area, keeping the pond in original place will unavoidably move other building structures aside or uphill to hillside slope, which is not preferable from environmental and engineering perspective. Also, keeping the Flamingo Pond at the centre of the Project area will unlikely attract wildlife because of the high level of human activities nearby. Therefore, a more balanced approach adopted in the preferred layout is to relocate the Flamingo Pond to the southern side of the Project area, which is “isolated” from the main structure and park activities at the central and northern part of the Project area. This setting, together with enhanced vegetation near the pond, is considered to have higher potential to attract wild birds.
As part of the sustainability vision for the Project, environmental friendly designs have been incorporated into the Project, including the following:
ˇ
Blending
of the building structure with nature environment and preserving the natural
landscape and topography with a series of cascading platforms positioned within
the Brick Hill valley. The building forms are an extension of the existing
slope topography integrating the Water Park rides; spaces blurring the edges
between indoor/ outdoor zones while maximising views
towards the bay;
ˇ
The
orientation of building has been positioned where building faces predominantly
south-west to receive maximum daylight;
ˇ
Taking
advantage of the existing slope conditions by locating ride platforms on or near
the slope to minimise the amount of support structure required;
ˇ
Landscaping
would permeate into the indoor and outdoor spaces, and the surrounding
landscape emerging into the existing valley to minimise visual impact;
ˇ
Providing
green roof and skylights to minimise reflection from roofing materials and
blending into the existing hillscape. Reduced use of
large glazing or transparent screening to minimise the risk of bird collision;
ˇ
Indoor
area to be categorised into different thermal zones
according to functional requirement to minimise the energy consumption;
ˇ
Adopting
natural ventilation for the indoor area during summer with minimal mechanical
ventilation to achieve both the thermal comfort and energy saving;
ˇ
Adopting
heat exchangers for retrieving waste heat from the Air Conditioning System for
pre-heating of hot water for general ablution and pool heating;
ˇ
Alternation
to existing seawall and marine works had been avoided hence no impact on
surrounding marine life;
ˇ
Adopting
Building Information Modeling (BIM) facilitates a more efficient design and
construction coordination and to avoid unforeseen or clashes which subsequently
generate abortive work and construction waste.
A number of environmental designs will be considered in the detailed design, construction and operation phases. These include:
ˇ
Selection
of environmental friendly and sustainable building materials;
ˇ
Introducing
rainwater harvesting system for recycling storm water on irrigation or cleaning
purpose;
ˇ
Using
renewable energy systems and energy efficient device, such as solar landscape
lighting, lighting control management system, low energy consumption signs, low
flow shower heads, dual flushing cisterns and co-generation/ tri-generation;
ˇ
Selection
of mechanically efficient systems such as centralised
cooling system;
ˇ
Consideration
of pre-bored rock socket steel H-piles for foundation which could generate less
noise and vibration as well as impose least disruption to the terrain;
ˇ Earth retaining structures and temporary
cut slopes, and excavation lateral support system for pile caps to generate
smaller volumes of excavated materials and balance the cut and fill volume in
order to reduce any surplus earth material disposal and minimise waste
management implications;
ˇ
Using
electric vehicles for guest shuttle service and staff transportation subject to
the development of available technology.
A number of environmental assessments were conducted at the early stages of the Project with the aim of identifying environmental impacts and alternative strategies in advance. As a result of this process, many environmental problems have been avoided or minimised. These include the following:
§ The preferred scheme makes good use of the already developed areas and establishes a series of platform so that large-scale slope excavation for outdoor park and subsequent loss of natural environment are avoided; also vegetation clearance/tree felling and visual impacts are minimised.
§ Minimising footprint on the existing hillside slopes by reducing the amount of structural support required so that ecological impact on natural habitats especially woodland and streams are minimised.
§ Adoption of “terrace” concept to avoid substantial visual impact and minimise incompatibility with the surrounding environment; also to minimise the use of glazing and the potential collision impact on birds.
§ Reprovision of the Flamingo Pond at the southern side of the Project area which is compatible with natural environment and more suitable for wildlife use.
§ Avoidance of works encroaching onto marine habitat and
potential impact on the marine environment and the associated fauna, noticeably
hard coral communities.
§ Reuse of spent cooling water for on-site flushing can
completely eliminate the need to discharge high temperature and chlorine
containing water into the marine environment, and hence minimise impact to the
coral communities in the nearby marine environment.
§ Implementing site practices as outlined in ProPECC Note PN 1/94 to control and minimise site runoff and drainage.
§ Install and maintain roadside gullies and
silt traps for removal of pollutants from stormwater.
§ Reuse of inert C&D materials as
far as practicable to minimise off-site delivery of surplus inert C&D
materials and the associated environmental impacts.
Compensation will be provided for the affected ardeid roosting site and woodland. For compensating the loss of pond and plantation areas that were used by a small group of ardeids for night-roosting, it is recommended to reserve part of the TSW area for ardeid use. The enhancement area for the roosting ardeids is located at the southern part of the Project area. The location is protected from strong wind from the south and near waterfront, both factors are favourable for night roost. As it is at the southern edge of the Project area, disturbance from operation of the Project including noise and light, to this enhancement area is relatively minor. Within the enhancement area, a Flamingo Pond will be provided to replace the removed Flamingo Pond (location indicated in Figure 10.4). These areas provide landscape setting similar to the lost roosting site, which is also established aside Flamingo Pond. For providing suitable roosting substrate for ardeids, native tree species at the existing planting area that was used by ardeids including Macaranga tanarius and Celtis sinensis, and other native tree species previously found to be used by ardeids at Wong Chuk Hang Nullah roosting site including Mallotus paniculatus, Ficus hispida and Cratoxylum cochinchinense will be provided where feasible. With suitable planting, wind-shielded and waterfront location and similar landscape setting to the lost roosting site, the enhancement area will provide an option for ardeids as a roosting site.
The 0.84 ha woodland compensation together with 0.78 ha on-site woodland reinstatement (for temporary lost woodland) will be provided synchronously to give a total of 1.62 ha woodland area. The location of the woodland area for compensation and reinstatement is presented in Figure 10.5 and overlaid on Figure 10.2 Habitat Map, which show the area is adjoining to existing woodland habitat and tall shrubland for maintaining an ecological linkage. In the woodland compensation area, whips will be planted with predominately native tree species similar to the affected woodland, such as Celtis sinensis, Cratoxylum cochinchinense, Polyspora axillaris and Sterculia lanceolata. These areas are adjacent to the existing woodland and tall shrubland habitats, thereby enhancing the overall habitat continuity and ecological linkage of the surrounding natural habitats and providing alternative habitats for the fauna affected by the proposed works.
The environmental benefits of the environmental protection measures that have been recommended for the Project include:
§ Air Quality – adoption of dust control measures to
reduce dust impacts and augmented by green transportation method such as
electric buses which avoids/minimises direct emissions of air pollutants from
transportation within the Project area;
§ Noise – adoption of good site practice and noise
management such as selecting quiet plant and use of movable barriers to
significantly reduce the impact of construction site activities on nearby NSRs;
§ Water Quality – reduction of excavation activities and
provision of silt traps within the Project area to prevent pollution of TSW.
All sewage effluent generated will be discharged to the existing APTW via sewer
connection at Nam Long Shan Road;
§ Waste Management – implementation of waste reduction
measures and good site practice during construction phase to prevent generation
of a significant amount of wastes and employ a reputable waste collector to
remove waste regularly during operation phase;
§ Land Contamination – once contaminated soil is
identified (if any), mitigation measures such as employment of bulk
earth-moving excavation equipment for the excavation and transportation of
contaminated materials would be implemented to reduce land contamination
impact;
§ Ecology – Avoidance of disturbance to the marine
environment, minimisation of impact on existing natural habitat and
compensation for potentially affected ardeid
roosting site and woodland will mitigate the potential ecological impacts;
§ Landscape – The project would avoid disturbance to
existing vegetation as far as practicable for preservation of its landscape and
ecological values. Landscape planting would be undertaken to increase the
amount of green space. Compensatory planting and enhancement planting would
also be adopted to enhance the environmental settings; and
§ Visual – The design of the Project is deeply rooted
into the beautiful natural surroundings and local site topography. The building
forms are an extension of the existing slope topography which maximises views
towards the bay and minimises potential visual impact to visual sensitive
receivers. Green roofs and vertical greening would also be provided where
feasible to screen and soften the hard edges of building structures.
The
conclusions of individual technical assessments are presented in Sections 14.2.9
to 14.2.18.
Potential air quality impacts from the construction works of the Project would mainly be related to construction dust from site clearance, excavation, foundation and site formation works. With proper implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, it has been assessed that all ASRs are predicted to comply with the TSP criterion as well as the relevant AQO for RSP and FSP.
During the construction phase a decrease in traffic along Nam Long Shan Road, Shum Wan Road, Heung Yip Road and Police School Road is expected. Minor increase (0.3%) to Wong Chuk Hang Road due to construction traffic and the associated coach diversion is expected. The environmental concern in term of air quality is considered insignificant. Hence, there are no adverse residual air quality impacts anticipated during the construction phase.
Vehicular emissions due to the increased traffic along the Shum Wan Road from the operation of the Project would be major source of air emissions identified. Based on the modelling results, it is predicted that all the identified ASRs would be in compliance with the AQOs for daily RSP, annual RSP, daily FSP, annual FSP, hourly NO2 and annual NO2. Hence, no adverse residual air quality impacts are anticipated during the operation phase.
The noise impact associated with unmitigated construction activities for the Project would cause exceedance of daytime construction noise criteria at the representative NSRs only during the examination periods. Therefore, good site practices and mitigation measures including the use of quieter plant and erection of movable noise barriers have been proposed to alleviate the noise impact. With the good site practices and mitigation measures in place, no residual impacts exceeding the relevant noise criteria are predicted at all NSRs.
The traffic flow induced by the operation of the Project in comparing with the base traffic flow is insignificant and therefore significant adverse off-site road traffic noise impact is not anticipated from the Project.
With the specification of maximum allowable SW004Cs for the proposed fixed plants and open air entertainment activities, full compliance of relevant noise criteria will be achieved and no residual impact exceeding the relevant noise criteria is anticipated.
During the construction phase, potential water quality impact would be generated from foundation works, site runoff, sewage from workforce, and discharge of wastewater from various construction activities. With the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, no adverse water quality impact from the construction works for the Project is anticipated.
Sewage effluent from operation of the Project would be discharged to the APTW via a new sewer connection to the existing sewerage network at Nam Long Shan Road and no overflow is anticipated from the new sewage sump pit.
Other potential impacts during operation phase include discharge of used pool water, spent cooling water and Flamingo Pond and Sea Turtle exhibit, and runoff from road surfaces and planting areas. With implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, adverse water quality impact is not expected.
The impact assessment has been carried out on the existing public sewerage network and treatment works to collect the sewage flow generated from the Project. The sewage flow from the Project is proposed to be discharged to the 450mm diameter sewer at Nam Long Shan Road and then conveyed to the APTW for treatment.
The hydraulic assessment results have revealed that the existing 450mm diameter gravity sewer along the Nam Long Shan Road should be able to handle all the sewage flows from the Project. Therefore, no adverse impact is anticipated on the existing 450mm diameter gravity sewers and the downstream sewerage system due to the Project.
In view of the assessment findings, it is considered that the design capacity of the existing APTW is
sufficient to handle the estimated total ADWF and Peak Flow from the Project and the relevant PDZ during the
ultimate scenario year of 2021. In conclusion, no adverse impact is
anticipated on the existing APTW due to the Project.
The major waste types generated by the construction activities will include C&D materials from excavation of hill slopes, foundation and site formation as well as from construction of new buildings and superstructures works; chemical waste from maintenance and servicing of construction plant and equipment; general refuse from the workforce and floating refuse trapped / accumulated on the artificial seawall. 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.
During
the operation phase, the key waste types generated will include general refuse
from recreational activities, retail stores and restaurants within the Project;
as well as chemical waste from routine
servicing and maintenance activities for different E&M equipment. There
would also be entrapment or accumulation of floating refuse on the artificial
seawall of the Project but it is anticipated to be negligible. Provided that
all these wastes are handled, transported and disposed of in strict accordance
with the relevant legislative requirements and the recommended mitigation
measures are properly implemented, no adverse environmental impact is expected
during the operation phase.
The land contamination assessment has been conducted by reviewing the historical and current land uses, desktop appraisal and site reconnaissance survey with respect to the potential land contamination at the Project area. Other relevant information collected from the related government departments has been reviewed.
Based on the findings of the desktop appraisal of the historical and current land uses and the site survey in the Project area, land contamination impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposal project is not anticipated.
In
case contaminated material is discovered after the commencement of works,
mitigation measures for handling of contaminated materials and regular site
audits are recommended to minimise the potential adverse impacts on workers’
health and safety and remediation/ disposal of potentially contaminated
materials.
The Project area comprises mainly developed area maintained with plantation and landscape planting; therefore most of the ecological resources within the Project area is limited by its artificial nature. The waterfront of the Project area is also of artificial nature. Hard coral communities were identified in TSW in previous coral monitoring surveys for OPC’s Repositioning project. But no marine works will be involved in the Project and marine ecological impact will not arise. In relation to the ecological impact due to terrestrial habitat loss, only the loss of woodland and pond are considered as moderate-minor impact which needs mitigation. On-site reinstatement and compensation of woodland and re-provision of Flamingo Pond similar to existing setting will mitigate the impact of habitat loss.
A community of ardeid was identified in the Project area, but after investigation the community was found only in temporary nature. Therefore, the ecological impact associated with the Project is very limited. During the course of field survey, it was found that the ardeid community that temporarily hosted in TSW has largely left the site and resettled in another suitable roosting site in Aberdeen Channel. On this account, TSW is considered less important to the roosting ardeids. Nonetheless, it is recommended to enhance a portion of the Project area to provide an alternative option for the ardeid community.
Given that majority of the habitat affected is artificial, the disturbed habitats of conservation value will be reinstated or compensated, and the ardeid community used to roost in the Project area has resettled to other roosting site, the ecological impact due to construction and operation of the Project is considered as minor and acceptable with various mitigation measures in place.
Review of existing information on commercial fisheries resources and fishing operations within the study area shows that the importance of capture fisheries resources in the study area is moderately-low in terms of overall fishing operations, and moderate in terms of fisheries production (both weight and value). Fish fry production is absent from the assessment area and no fish culture zones, artificial reefs, important spawning areas or nursery grounds for commercial species are present.
During the construction phase, disturbance to fisheries may arise from vessel activities associated with transportation of superstructures, and indirect impact of water quality change associated with land-based construction works. However the impact on fisheries resources/production and fishing activity is predicted to be temporary and insignificant. During the operation phase, change in water quality may also occur due to discharge of sewage and runoffs. However, only negligible impact to fisheries resources/production is expected.
Furthermore, with good site practices and mitigation measures in place, it is expected that there would be no significant impacts to fisheries and no fisheries-specific mitigation measures are required given that the water quality mitigation measures are implemented properly.
With the implementation of proposed
mitigation measures, the anticipated landscape impacts are generally moderate
adverse to insubstantial during the construction phase due to site clearance
and removal of existing vegetation. Upon
completion of the Project, compensatory planting, enhancement planting, green
roofs and vertical greening will be provided to compensate for the loss of
vegetation during construction. A new
“Flamingo Pond” will also be constructed to replace the removed semi-natural
ponds. However, the loss of some of the
landscape resources will not be fully compensated. The residual landscape impact in operation
phase is therefore generally insubstantial with slight adverse impacts expected
for some landscape resources.
With the implementation of proposed
mitigation measures, the anticipated visual impacts are generally slight
adverse to insubstantial for daytime and largely insubstantial for night-time
during the construction phase due to unobstructed or partially obstructed views
of construction activities and screen hoarding.
Upon completion of the Project, planting within the proposed Project can
act as visual screen to visual sensitive receivers. The residual visual impact in operation phase
is generally slight adverse to insubstantial in daytime and largely
insubstantial in night-time with slight adverse impacts expected on some
VSRs.
Overall, in terms of Annex 10, Clause 1.1
(c) of the EIAO – TM, it is concluded that the landscape and visual impacts are
acceptable with mitigation measures.
A summary of environmental impacts identified in this Project is provided in Table 14.1.
A summary of key assessment assumptions, limitation of assessment methodologies and related prior agreements with relevant Government Departments is provided in Table 14.2.
Table 14.1: Summary of Environmental Impacts
|
Assessment Points |
Results of Impact Predictions |
Relevant Standards / Criteria |
Extent of Exceedances Predicted |
Impact Avoidance Measures Considered |
Mitigation Measures Proposed |
Residual Impacts |
|
Air Quality Impact – Construction Phase |
||||||
|
Air Sensitive Receivers (ASRs) within 500 m Assessment area. ASRs required to assess in study brief are outside the 500 m boundary from the Project area. |
§ Compliance with the AQO for hourly TSP, daily RSP and daily FSP under Tier 1 mitigated scenario. § Compliance with the AQO for annual RSP and annual FSP under unmitigated and mitigated scenario. |
§ Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM) (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 |
With the mitigation measures in place, the predicted cumulative TSP, RSP and FSP levels at all ASRs would comply with the relevant TSP criterion as well as the relevant AQO for RSP and FSP. |
N/A |
§ Use of regular water spraying (once every 2.5 hours or 4 times per day) to reduce dust emissions from heavy construction activities (including ground excavation, earth moving, etc.) at all active works area, exposed site surfaces and unpaved roads, particularly during dry weather. § Covering 80% of stockpiling area by impervious sheets and spraying all dusty material with water immediately prior to any loading transfer operations to keep the dusty materials wet during material handling at the stockpile areas § Dust control practices as stipulated in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation |
Adverse residual impact is not anticipated |
|
Air Quality Impact – Operation
Phase |
||||||
|
Air Sensitive Receivers within 500 m Assessment area. ASRs required to assess in study brief are outside the 500 m boundary from the Project area. |
§ Compliance with the AQO for hourly and annual NO2, daily and annual RSP, and daily and annual FSP. |
§ Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM) (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); |
Based on the modelling results, it is predicted that all the identified ASRs would be in compliance with the AQOs for daily RSP, annual RSP, daily FSP, annual FSP, hourly NO2 and annual NO2. |
N/A |
N/A |
Adverse residual impact is not anticipated |
|
Hazard
to Human Life |
||||||
|
Project area |
§ No on-site storage of liquefied chlorine and overnight storage of explosives for the Project, hazard is not anticipated to be of concern. § Hazard to life to evaluate the potential hazard is therefore not required |
§ Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG) |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
|
Noise Impact –
Construction Phase |
||||||
|
The study area is expanded to include NSRs at distances over 300m from the Project |
No exceedance in NSRs under mitigated scenario including the examination period |
§ Annex 5 and 13 of EIAO-TM; § Noise Control Ordinance (NCO); § TM on Noise from Construction Work other than Percussive Piling (GW-TM); and § TM on Noise from Construction Work in Designated Areas (DA-TM) |
N/A |
N/A |
§ Good site
practice to limit noise emissions at source; § Selection of quieter
plant; and § Use of movable noise barrier. |
No adverse residual impacts exceeding the relevant noise criteria would be anticipated. |
|
Noise Impact – Operation
Phase (Road Traffic) |
||||||
|
The study area is expanded to include NSRs at distances over 300m from the Project |
No more than 1.0 dB(A) increment due to the induced road traffic. |
§ Annex 5 and 13 of EIAO-TM; and § Noise Control Ordinance (NCO). |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
No more than 1.0 dBA) increment due to the induced road traffic. No adverse residual impacts exceeding the relevant noise criteria would be anticipated. |
|
Noise Impact – Operation Phase (Fixed Plant) |
|
|||||
|
The study area is expanded to include NSRs at distances over 300m from the Project |
The maximum allowable SWLs of the proposed fixed plants during day time and evening time are predicted |
§ Annex 5 and 13 of EIAO-TM; § Noise Control Ordinance (NCO); and § TM for the Assessment of Noise from Places other than Domestic Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites (IND-TM). |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
No adverse residual impacts exceeding the relevant noise criteria would be anticipated. |
|
Noise Impact – Operation Phase (Open Air Entertainment) |
|
|||||
|
The study area is expanded to include NSRs at distances over 300m from the Project |
The maximum allowable SWLs at assessment point during day time and evening time are predicted |
§ Annexes 5 and 13 of EIAO-TM; § Noise Control Ordinance (NCO); and § Noise Control Guidelines for Holding Open Air Entertainment Activities |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
No adverse residual impacts exceeding the relevant noise criteria would be anticipated. |
|
Water Quality Impact – Construction Phase |
||||||
|
Water sensitive receivers within: § Western Buffer WCZ; and § Southern WCZ |
No impacts anticipated |
§ EIAO-TM Annexes 6
& 14 § WPCO § Western Buffer
WCZ WQO § Southern WCZ WQO § TM-DSS § ProPECC Note PN 1/94 |
N/A |
§ No marine works. § No reclamation. |
§ Implementation of
guidelines set in ProPECC Note PN 1/94; § Provision of chemical
toilets for construction workforce; § Treatment of wastewater per WPCO requirements prior to discharge; and § Treatment of chemical wastes in accordance to Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation and Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes |
No residual impact is anticipated |
|
Water Quality Impact – Operation
Phase |
||||||
|
Water sensitive receivers within: § Western Buffer WCZ; and § Southern WCZ |
No impacts anticipated |
§ EIAO-TM Annexes 6
& 14 § WPCO § Western Buffer
WCZ WQO § Southern WCZ WQO § TM-DSS § ProPECC Note PN 1/94 |
N/A |
§ Daily discharge to storm system will be less than 6000m3/day. § Re-use of spent cooling water for on-site flushing. § Daily system recirculation of 99.7% of total system volume for Sea Turtle Exhibit. |
§ Silt traps should be regularly checked and maintained to ensure efficient operation; § Watering of plants on site should always be performed before application of pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers; § Regular training should also be provided to frontline staff on the appropriate treatment and disposal of pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers. |
No residual impact is anticipated |
|
Sewerage
and Sewage Treatment Implication – Construction Phase |
||||||
|
Refer to the relevant parts of the Water Quality Impact – Construction Phase |
|
|
|
|
||
|
Sewerage
and Sewage Treatment Implication – Operation Phase |
||||||
|
§ Sewer at Sham Wan Road § Sewer at Nam Long Shan Road § Pumping station at Sham Wan Road § Aberdeen Preliminary Treatment Works (APTW) |
No impact anticipated |
§ Guidelines for Estimating Sewage Flows for Sewage Infrastructure Planning Version 1.0 published by EPD (GESF) § Sewerage Manual – Part 1 published by DSD (SM1) |
N/A |
N/A |
· Bottom of the sewage pump pit inclined to
minimize the likelihood of sludge accumulation · Sewage retention time in the pump pit not to
exceed 30 minutes · Rising main to be constructed from ductile
iron pipes with epoxy internal linings · Design minimum velocity within the rising
mains to be 1m/s at full bore condition |
No residual impact is anticipated |
|
Waste
Management Implication – Construction Phase |
||||||
|
Project area |
§ Inert C&D materials of about 95,800m3 generated from excavation works of hill slopes, foundation and site formation as well as construction and superstructure works; § Non-inert C&D materials of about 2,500m3 generated from excavation works of hill slopes, foundation and site formation as well as construction and superstructure works; § General refuse of maximum daily arising of up to 260kg from construction workforce; § Small quantity of chemical waste from maintenance and servicing of construction plant and equipment; § Floating refuse to be collected from the artificial seawall is negligible. |
§ Annexes 7 and 15 of EIAO-TM § 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 Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances Regulation (Cap. 132BK); and § Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28). |
N/A |
§ Minimise site excavation for new sections EVA and minimise the amount of excavated materials to be generated; § Placement of fill in areas where proposed building structure is above existing ground level may utilise cut material generated from construction as fill material; and § Adoption of lateral support system for excavation works to minimise the excavation extent and potential ground water intrusion. |
§ Good site practices and waste reduction measures for C&D materials § Handling of chemical wastes in accordance with the Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes, and disposal of chemical wastes at licensed chemical waste recycling/ treatment facilities § Employ a reputable licensed waste collector for disposal of general refuse and floating refuse at designated landfill sites |
No adverse residual impacts would be anticipated. |
|
Waste
Management Implication – Operation Phase |
||||||
|
Project area |
§ About 2,065kg/day of general
refuse from operation of the Project will mainly be generated from
recreational activities, retail stores and restaurants; § Chemical waste from maintenance and servicing activities for air conditioning system, emergency generators and other electrical and mechanical equipment; and § Floating refuse to be collected from the artificial seawall is negligible. |
§ Waste Disposal Ordinance (Cap. 354); and § Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation (Cap. 354C). |
N/A |
N/A |
§ Employ a reputable licensed waste collector to collect general refuse on a daily basis and dispose of the general refuse at designated landfill sites § Handling of chemical wastes in accordance with the Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes, and disposal of chemical wastes at licensed chemical waste recycling/ treatment facilities § Regular inspection of floating refuse trapped or accumulated on the artificial seawall. |
No adverse residual impacts would be anticipated. |
|
Land
Contamination – Construction Phase |
||||||
|
Project area |
§ The land contamination assessment has been conducted by reviewing the historical and current land uses, desktop appraisal and site reconnaissance survey with respect to the potential land contamination at the Project area. § Land contamination impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposal project is not anticipated. |
§ Section 3 of Annex 19 of EIAO-TM; § Guidance Note for Contaminated Land Assessment and Remediation; § Guidance Manual for Use of Risk-based Remediation Goals for Contaminated Land Management; and § Practice Guide for Investigation and Remediation of Contaminated Land. |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
No adverse residual impacts would be anticipated. |
|
Land
Contamination – Operation Phase |
||||||
|
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
|
Ecological
Impact – Construction and Operation Phase |
||||||
|
Flora, fauna and habitats within 500m assessment area and any other areas likely to be impacted by the Project |
Moderate-minor for the loss of woodland and pond; minor impact for loss of other habitat and other impacts, including impact on plant species of conservation interest, impact on ardeids at TSW, impact on terrestrial fauna species of conservation interest, off-site disturbance and impact on environmental quality, reduction of ecological carrying capacity, habitat fragmentation, bird collision to new building structures, impact on coral communities and intertidal habitats |
Annexes 8 and 16 of EIAO-TM; EIAO GN Nos. 6/2010, 7/2010 & 10/2010 |
N/A |
§ Avoid the need of large-scale slope works for preserving the natural landscape of the Site § Avoid any works encroaching onto marine habitat |
§ Reduced use of large glazing or transparent screening § Enhancement area with a Flamingo Pond similar to existing setting § Site survey before commencement of site clearance § Protection of floral species of conservation interest within Project area § Avoidance of site clearance and tree felling works at the existing ardeid night roost location during the peak wintering season of ardeids § Woodland compensation and reinstatement § Implementation of good site practice during construction stage. |
No residual impact predicted |
|
Fisheries
Impact – Construction and Operation Phases |
||||||
|
Areas within 500 meters from the boundary of the Project area covering Western and Southern Buffer Water Control Zones (WCZs) |
§ No impact due to loss of fishing ground would occur. § Direct impact on fishing operations is predicted to be insignificant during both construction and operation phases. § Indirect impact of deterioration of water quality is expected to be negligible during both construction and operation phases. § No implications on fisheries resources and fisheries operations due to change of hydrology and tidal flow. |
§ Fisheries Protection Ordinance (Cap 171); § Marine Fish Culture Ordinance (Cap 353); § Water Pollution Control Ordinance (WPCO) (Cap. 358); and § Environmental
Impact Assessment Ordinance (Cap. 499) and the Technical Memorandum on
Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM). |
N/A |
Relevant avoidance measures as detailed above for the water quality aspect |
Relevant water quality mitigation measures during construction and operation phases as detailed above |
No adverse residual impact is anticipated |
|
Landscape
and Visual Impact – Construction Phase |
||||||
|
LRs and LCAs within 500m assessment area; VSRs within visual envelope |
Unmitigated impacts generally significant adverse to insubstantial |
Annexes 10 and 18 of EIAO-TM; EIAO GN No. 8/2010 |
N/A |
§ Avoidance of any works encroaching onto marine habitat |
§ CP01 – Minimisation of Construction Period § CP02 – Minimisation of Works Areas § CP03 – Construction Site Controls § CP04 – Preservation of Existing Vegetation § CP05 – Transplantation of Existing Trees § CP06 – No Intrusion Zones § CP07 – Temporary Tree Nurseries § CP08 – Advance Planting § CP09 – Construction Site Hoardings § CP10 – Dust and Erosion Control for Exposed Soil § CP11 – Appearance of Construction Plant / Machinery § CP12 – Construction Lighting Control § CP13 – Appearance of Construction Workers |
Residual landscape impacts generally moderate adverse to insubstantial; residual visual impacts generally slight adverse to insubstantial for daytime and largely insubstantial for night-time |
|
Landscape
and Visual Impact – Operation Phase |
||||||
|
LRs and LCAs within 500m assessment area; VSRs within visual envelope |
Unmitigated impacts generally significant adverse to insubstantial |
Annexes 10 and 18 of of EIAO-TM; EIAO GN NO. 8/2010 |
N/A |
N/A |
§ OP01 – Sensitive Design and Disposition § OP02 – Compensatory Tree Planting § OP03 – Enhancement Planting § OP04 – Green Roofs and Vertical Greening § OP05 – Reprovision of Flamingo Pond § OP06 – Responsive Lighting Design § OP07 – Woodland Compensation |
Residual landscape impacts generally insubstantial with slight adverse impacts for some LRs; residual visual impacts generally slight adverse to insubstantial in daytime and largely insubstantial in night-time with slight adverse impacts on some VSRs |
Table 14.2: Key Assessment Assumptions, Limitations of Assessment Methodologies and Prior Agreements