4.1 Legislation, Standards and Guidelines
4.2 Description of the Noise Environment
4.3 Construction Airborne Noise Impact Assessment
4.4 Construction Groundborne Noise Impact Assessment
4.5 Road Traffic Noise Impact Assessment
4.6 Fixed Noise Sources Impact Assessment
4.7 Aircraft
Noise Impact Assessment
4.8 Rail
Airborne Noise Assessment
4.9 Rail
Groundborne Noise Assessment
4.10 Helicopter
Noise Assessment
4.11 Marine
Traffic Noise Impact Assessment
Figure 4.1 Existing and Planned Noise Sources (Sheet 1 of 3)
Figure 4.1a Existing and Planned Noise Sources (Sheet 2 of 3)
Figure 4.1b Existing and Planned Noise Sources (Sheet 3 of 3)
Figure 4.2 Road and Rail Layout near Tung Chung East
Figure 4.3a NEF Contours Against TCE Phasing (Year 2011) (Sheet 1 of 3)
Figure 4.3b-1 NEF Contours Against TCE Phasing (Year 2011) (Sheet 2 of 3)
Figure 4.3b-2 NEF Contours Against TCE Phasing (Year 2011) (Sheet 3 of 3)
Figure 4.3c NEF Contours Against TCE Phasing (Year 2021) (Sheet 1 of 3)
Figure 4.3d-1 NEF Contours Against TCE Phasing (Year 2021) (Sheet 2 of 3)
Figure 4.3d-2 NEF Contours Against TCE Phasing (Year 2021) (Sheet 3 of 3)
Figure 4.3e NEF Contours Against TCE Phasing (Year 2030) (Sheet 1 of 3)
Figure 4.3f-1 NEF Contours Against TCE Phasing (Year 2030) (Sheet 2 of 3)
Figure 4.3f-2 NEF Contours Against TCE Phasing (Year 2030) (Sheet 3 of 3)
Figure 4.3g NEF Contours
Against TCE Phasing (Year 2032) (Sheet 1 of 3)
Figure 4.3h-1 NEF Contours Against TCE Phasing (Year 2032) (Sheet 2 of 3)
Figure 4.3h-2 NEF Contours Against TCE Phasing (Year 2032) (Sheet 3 of 3)
Figure 4.4 Prevailing Noise Measurement Locations
Figure 4.5 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Construction Airborne Noise) (Sheet 1 of 9)
Figure 4.5-1 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Construction Airborne Noise) (Sheet 2 of 9)
Figure 4.5-2 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Construction Airborne Noise) (Sheet 3 of 9)
Figure 4.5-3 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Construction Airborne Noise) (Sheet 4 of 9)
Figure 4.5a Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Construction Airborne Noise) (Sheet 5 of 9)
Figure 4.5b Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Construction Airborne Noise) (Sheet 6 of 9)
Figure 4.5c Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Construction Airborne Noise) (Sheet 7 of 9)
Figure 4.5d Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Construction Airborne Noise) (Sheet 8 of 9)
Figure 4.5e Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Construction Airborne Noise) (Sheet 9 of 9)
Figure 4.6 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Construction Groundborne Noise) (Sheet 1 of 2)
Figure 4.6a Location
of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Construction Groundborne Noise)
(Sheet 2 of 2)
Figure 4.7 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic Noise) (Sheet 1 of 20)
Figure 4.7-1 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic
Noise) (Sheet 2 of 20)
Figure 4.7-2 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic
Noise) (Sheet 3 of 20)
Figure 4.7-3 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic Noise) (Sheet 4 of 20)
Figure 4.7a Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic
Noise) (Sheet 5 of 20)
Figure 4.7b Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic
Noise) (Sheet 6 of 20)
Figure 4.7c Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic Noise) (Sheet 7 of 20)
Figure 4.7d Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic Noise) (Sheet 8 of 20)
Figure 4.7e Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic
Noise) (Sheet 9 of 20)
Figure 4.7f Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic Noise) (Sheet 10 of 20)
Figure 4.7g Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic Noise) (Sheet 11 of 20)
Figure 4.7h Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic Noise) (Sheet 12 of 20)
Figure 4.7i Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic Noise) (Sheet 13 of 20)
Figure 4.7j Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic
Noise) (Sheet 14 of 20)
Figure 4.7k Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic Noise) (Sheet 15 of 20)
Figure 4.7l Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic
Noise) (Sheet 16 of 20)
Figure 4.7m Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic
Noise) (Sheet 17 of 20)
Figure 4.7n Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic
Noise) (Sheet 18 of 20)
Figure 4.7o Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic
Noise) (Sheet 19 of 20)
Figure 4.7p Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Road Traffic
Noise) (Sheet 20 of 20)
Figure 4.8 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Fixed Noise) (Sheet 1 of 3)
Figure 4.8a Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Fixed Noise)
(Sheet 2 of 3)
Figure 4.8b Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Fixed Noise) (Sheet 3 of 3)
Figure 4.9 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Aircraft Noise)
Figure 4.10 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Railway Airborne Noise) (Sheet 1 of 3)
Figure 4.10a Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Railway Airborne
Noise) (Sheet 2 of 3)
Figure 4.10b Location
of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Railway Airborne Noise) (Sheet 3 of
3)
Figure 4.11 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Railway Groundborne Noise) (Sheet 1 of 2)
Figure 4.11a Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Railway Groundborne Noise) (Sheet 2 of 2)
Figure 4.12 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Helicopter Noise)
Figure 4.13 Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Marine Traffic Noise) (Sheet 1 of 3)
Figure 4.13a Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Marine Traffic Noise) (Sheet 2 of 3)
Figure 4.13b Location of Representative Noise Assessment Points (Marine Traffic Noise) (Sheet 3 of 3)
Figure 4.14a Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2023 (Sheet 1 of 3)
Figure 4.14a-1 Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2023 (Sheet 2 of 3)
Figure 4.14a-2 Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2023 (Sheet 3 of 3)
Figure 4.14b Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2025 (Sheet 1 of 3)
Figure 4.14b-1 Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2025 (Sheet 2 of 3)
Figure 4.14b-2 Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2025 (Sheet 3 of 3)
Figure 4.14c Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2027 (Sheet 1 of 4)
Figure 4.14c-1 Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2027 (Sheet 2 of 4)
Figure 4.14c-2 Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2027 (Sheet 3 of 4)
Figure 4.14c-3 Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2027 (Sheet 4 of 4)
Figure 4.14d Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2045 (Sheet 1 of 4)
Figure 4.14d-1 Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2045 (Sheet 2 of 4)
Figure 4.14d-2 Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2045 (Sheet 3 of 4)
Figure 4.14d-3 Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise at 2045 (Sheet 4 of 4)
Figure 4.14e Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise (Sheet 1 of 3)
Figure 4.14e-1 Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise (Sheet 2 of 3)
Figure 4.14e-2 Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise (Sheet 3 of 3)
Figure 4.15a Mitigation Measures for Railway Airborne Noise before 2026 (Sheet 1 of 2)
Figure 4.15a-1 Mitigation Measures for Railway Airborne Noise before 2026 (Sheet 2 of 2)
Figure 4.15b Mitigation Measures for Railway Airborne Noise after 2026 (Sheet 1 of 4)
Figure 4.15b-1 Mitigation Measures for Railway Airborne Noise after 2026 (Sheet 2 of 4)
Figure 4.15b-2 Mitigation Measures for Railway Airborne Noise after 2026 (Sheet 3 of 4)
Figure 4.15b-3 Mitigation Measures for Railway Airborne Noise after 2026 (Sheet 4 of 4)
Figure 4.15c Mitigation Measures for Railway Airborne Noise (Sheet 1 of 2)
Figure 4.15c-1 Mitigation Measures for Railway Airborne Noise (Sheet 2 of 2)
Figure 4.16 Overall Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise and Railway Noise (Sheet 1 of 3)
Figure 4.16a Overall Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise and Railway Noise (Sheet 2 of 3)
Figure 4.16b Overall Mitigation Measures for Road Traffic Noise and Railway Noise (Sheet 3 of 3)
Appendix
4.1 Photos of Existing NSRs
Appendix
4.1a NSR and Area Sensitivity Rating adopted in
Different Noise Assessments
Appendix
4.2 SWL of PME
Appendix
4.3 Detailed PME Inventory
Appendix
4.4 Locations of Workfronts and Phases of
Construction
Appendix
4.5 Monthly Unmitigated Noise Contribution
Appendix
4.6 Unmitigated Construction Noise Impact at
Selected NSRs
Appendix
4.6a Unmitigated Construction Noise Impact at
Various Representative Floor Levels
Appendix
4.7 Sketch of Typical Temporary Noise Barrier/
Enclosure
Appendix
4.8 Monthly Mitigated Noise Contribution
Appendix
4.9 Mitigated Construction Noise Impact at
Selected NSRs
Appendix
4.9a Mitigated Construction Noise Impact at
Various Representative Floor Levels
Appendix
4.10 Construction Groundborne Noise
Assessment Methodology
Appendix
4.10a Construction Groundborne Noise
Assessment Results
Appendix
4.11 Computer Plot of Noise Model (TCE and TCW)
Appendix 4.12 Key Map of Traffic Flow and Traffic Data
at 2023, 2025, 2027 and 2045
Appendix 4.13a Detailed Road Traffic Noise Level at NAPs
(Unmitigated) at 2023
Appendix
4.13b Detailed Road Traffic Noise Level at NAPs
(Unmitigated) at 2025
Appendix
4.13c Detailed Road Traffic Noise Level at NAPs
(Unmitigated) at 2027
Appendix
4.13d Detailed Road Traffic Noise Level at NAPs
(Unmitigated) at 2045
Appendix
4.14a Detailed Road Traffic Noise Level at NAPs
(Mitigated) at 2023
Appendix
4.14b Detailed Road Traffic Noise Level at NAPs
(Mitigated) at 2025
Appendix
4.14c Detailed Road Traffic Noise Level at NAPs
(Mitigated) at 2027
Appendix
4.14d Detailed Road Traffic Noise Level at NAPs
(Mitigated) at 2045
Appendix
4.15 Calculation of Maximum Allowable SWL
of Planned Salt Water Pumping Station/ Sewage Pumping Stations
Appendix
4.16 Predicted SPL at NSRs due to Sports Ground
Appendix
4.17 Calculation of Maximum Allowable SWL of
TCE/TCW Railway Stations and associated facilities
Appendix
4.18 Rail Airborne Noise Assessment
Methodology
Appendix 4.19 Rail Noise Source Term Measurement
Appendix 4.20 Rail Noise Measurement Validation
Appendix 4.21 Detailed Rail Noise Level at NAPs
(Unmitigated)
Appendix
4.21a Detailed Rail Noise Level at NAPs
(Mitigated)
Appendix
4.22 Rail Groundborne Noise Assessment
Methodology
Appendix 4.22a Rail Vibration Source Term Measurement
Appendix
4.23 Operational Groundborne Noise Assessment
Results
Appendix
4.24 Helicopter Noise Assessment Area
Determination
Appendix
4.25 Detailed Helicopter Noise Assessment Results
Appendix 4.26 Marine
Traffic Noise Assessment Methodology
Appendix 4.26a Marine Noise Source Determination
Appendix 4.27 Marine Traffic Noise Assessment Area
Determination
Appendix 4.28 Detailed Marine Traffic Noise Level at
NAPs (Unmitigated)
4.1 Legislation, Standards and Guidelines
4.1.1 General
4.1.1.1
The relevant legislation
and associated guidance applicable to the present study for the assessment of
noise impacts include:
·
Noise Control Ordinance (NCO) (Cap.400);
·
Technical Memoranda (TM) on Noise from
Construction Work other than Percussive Piling (TM-GW);
·
TM on Noise from Percussive Piling
(TM-PP);
·
TM on Noise on Construction Work in
Designated Areas (TM-DA);
·
TM on Noise from Places other than
Domestic Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites (TM-Places); and
·
Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance
(EIAO) (Cap. 499) and TM-EIAO.
4.1.2 Construction Noise
Construction Airborne Noise During Normal Hours
4.1.2.1 The NCO provides the statutory framework for noise control in Hong Kong. Assessment procedures and standards are set out in the respective TM promulgated under NCO.
4.1.2.2 To ensure a better environment, the TM-EIAO promulgated under the EIAO has imposed more stringent criteria. For construction, there is no statutory limit on daytime construction noise under the NCO and related TMs. Nevertheless, the TM-EIAO stipulates criteria of 65 – 75dB(A) for daytime construction activities, as shown in the following table.
Table 4.1 Noise standards for construction activities
Uses |
Noise Standards[1],
Leq (30mins) dB(A) |
0700 to 1900 hours on any day not
being a Sunday or general holiday |
|
All domestic premises including temporary housing accommodation |
75 |
Hotels and hostels |
75 |
Educational institutions including kindergartens, nurseries and all
others where unaided voice communication is required |
70 65 (During examinations) |
Note:
[1] The above standards apply to uses that rely on opened windows for
ventilation.
4.1.2.3
In addition, reference has been made to
EIAO Guidance Note No. 09/2010 on “Preparation of Construction Noise Impact
Assessment under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance”.
Construction Airborne Noise During Restricted Hours
4.1.2.4
The NCO also provides statutory control on
general construction works during restricted hours (i.e. 1900 to 0700 hours (of
the next day) from Monday to Saturday and at any time on Sundays or public
holidays). The use of Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) for construction works
during restricted hours would require a Construction Noise Permit (CNP). The
TM-GW details the procedures adopted by Environmental Protection Department
(EPD) for assessing such application. The granting of a CNP is subject to
conditions stated in the CNP and it may be revoked at any time for failure to
comply with the permit conditions.
4.1.2.5
In addition to the general controls on the
use of PME during restricted hours, the use of Specified Powered Mechanical
Equipment (SPME) and the undertaking of Prescribed Construction Work (PCW)
during the restricted hours in a designated area are controlled by the
TM-DA. Construction plant or equipment
classified as SPME under the TM-DA includes hand-held breakers, bulldozers,
concrete lorry mixers, dump trucks and poker vibrators. The PCW includes the
erection or dismantling of formwork or scaffolding, hammering, handling of
rubble, wooden boards, steel bars, or scaffolding material, and the disposal of
rubble through plastic chutes.
4.1.2.6
The TM-DA details the procedures that
should generally be adopted by the Authority for assessing the use of SPME
during restricted hours and for determining whether a CNP would be issued.
4.1.2.7
Maximum noise levels from construction
activities during restricted hours at affected Noise Sensitive Receivers (NSRs)
are controlled under the TMs and shall not exceed the specified Acceptable
Noise Levels (ANLs). These ANLs are stipulated in accordance with the Area
Sensitivity Ratings established for the NSRs. The ANLs for construction works
in Designated Areas are more stringent than those given in the TM-GW and are
summarised in the following table.
Table 4.2 ANLs for construction during restricted hours
Time Period |
ANLs for Area
Sensitivity Ratings[1], dB(A) |
||
A |
B |
C |
|
All weekdays during the evening (1900 to 2300 hours), and general holidays
(including Sundays) during the day and evening (0700 to 2300 hours) |
60 (45) |
65 (50) |
70 (55) |
All days during the night-time (2300 to 0700 hours) |
45 (30) |
50 (35) |
55 (40) |
Note:
[1] Figures in brackets are ANLs for SPME construction work in designated
areas.
4.1.2.8
As defined in the Noise Control Designated
Area Plan No. EPD/NP/NT-05, Tung Chung areas such as Yu Tung Court, Fu Tung
Estate, Coastal Skyline, Yat Tung Estate, Shek Mun Kap, etc are within the
Designated Area.
4.1.2.9
Despite any description made in this
report, there is no guarantee that a CNP will be issued for the project
construction. The Noise Control Authority will consider a well-justified CNP
application, once filed, for construction works within restricted hours as
guided by the relevant TMs issued under the NCO. The Noise Control Authority
will take into account contemporary conditions / situations of adjoining land
uses and any previous complaints against construction activities at the site
before making a decision in granting a CNP. Nothing in the report shall bind
the Noise Control Authority in making a decision. If a CNP is to be issued, the
Noise Control Authority shall include in it any conditions demand. Failure to
comply with any such conditions will lead to cancellation of the CNP and
prosecution under the NCO.
Percussive Piling
4.1.2.10
Under the TM-PP, CNPs are also required
for percussive piling involving the use of diesel, pneumatic and / or steam
hammer. This TM specifies the permitted hours and other conditions for
percussive piling. Table 4.3 lists
the acceptable percussive piling noise levels for various types of NSR.
Table 4.3 ANLs for percussive piling
NSR Window Type or Means of Ventilation |
ANL, dB(A) |
(i) NSR (or part of
NSR) with no window or other opening |
100 |
(ii) NSR with central
air conditioning system. |
90 |
(iii) NSR with windows or other openings
but without central air conditioning system |
85 |
4.1.2.11
Depending on the numbers and types of
piling machines and the separation from NSRs, percussive piling may be
restricted to 12, 5 or 3 hours per day. For NSRs that are particularly sensitive
to noise, such as hospitals, medical clinics, educational institutions and
courts of law, a further reduction of 10dB(A) shall be applied to the above
ANLs.
Construction Groundborne Noise During Normal Hours
4.1.2.12
Noise arising from general construction
works that may generate groundborne noise during normal working hours is
governed by the TM-EIAO under the EIAO as shown in Table 4.1. The TM-Places under the NCO stipulates that noise
transmitted primarily through the structural elements of building, or
buildings, shall be 10dB(A) less than the relevant ANLs.
4.1.2.13
Based on the same principle for the
ground-borne noise criteria (i.e. ANL-10 dB(A) under the TM-Places), the
construction groundborne noise levels inside domestic premises and schools
shall be limited to 65dB(A) and 60dB(A) respectively when compared to the
TM-EIAO.
4.1.2.14
A summary of construction groundborne
noise criteria for daytime construction activities is given in the table below.
Table 4.4 Construction groundborne noise criteria
NSR type |
Noise Criteria,
dB(A) |
0700
to 1900 hours on
any day not being a Sunday or general holiday |
|
All domestic
premises including temporary housing accommodation |
65 |
Hotels and
hostel |
|
Educational
institutions including kindergarten, nurseries and all others where unaided
voice communication is required |
60 55 (for during examination) |
Construction Groundborne Noise During Restricted Hours
4.1.2.15
Similar
to construction airborne noise during restricted hours, NCO also provides
statutory control of construction work during restricted hours. As discussed in
the above section, same principle for groundborne noise criteria (i.e. ANL-10dB(A)
under the TM-Places) shall be adopted. Therefore, table below summarizes the
construction groundborne noise criteria.
Table 4.5 Construction groundborne noise
during restricted hours
Time
Period |
Noise
Criteria, dB(A) for Area Sensitivity Ratings, dB(A) |
||
A |
B |
C |
|
All weekdays during the evening (1900 to 2300
hours), and general holidays (including Sundays) during the day and evening
(0700 to 2300 hours) |
50 |
55 |
60 |
All days during the night-time (2300 to 0700 hours) |
35 |
40 |
45 |
4.1.3
Operational Noise
4.1.3.1
The TM-EIAO (Annex 5 of TM) has stipulated
the noise standards for various noise sources as shown in Table 4.6. It should, however, be noted that the following noise
criteria are only applicable to uses that rely on opened windows for
ventilation.
Table
4.6 Noise standards for operational phase
Common
Uses |
Noise Standards[1] |
||||
Aircraft Noise (Noise Exposure Forecast: NEF) |
Helicopter Noise Lmax dB(A)
0700 – 1900 hours |
Road Traffic Noise L10 (1hour) dB(A) |
Rail Noise[2] |
Fixed Noise Sources |
|
All domestic premises including temporary housing accommodation |
25 |
85 |
70 |
(a) The
appropriate ANLs shown in Table 2 of the Technical Memorandum for the
Assessment of Noise from Places Other than Domestic Premises, Public Places
or Construction Sites and (b) Lmax (2300-0700
hours) = 85dB(A) |
(a) 5dB(A)
below the appropriate ANLs shown in Table 2 of the Technical Memorandum for
the Assessment of Noise from Places Other than Domestic Premises, Public
Places or Construction Sites, or (b) the prevailing
background noise levels (For quiet areas with level 5 dB(A) below the ANL) |
Hotels and hostels |
25 |
85 |
70 |
||
Offices |
30 |
90 |
70 |
||
Educational institutions including kindergartens,
nurseries and all others where unaided voice communication is required |
25 |
85 |
65 |
||
Places of public worship and courts of law |
25 |
85 |
65 |
||
Hospitals, clinics, convalescences and homes for the
aged, diagnostic rooms, wards |
25 |
85 |
55 |
Notes:
[1] The above standards apply to uses that rely
on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] Rail noise is under the control of the NCO
and shall comply with the ANLs laid down in the Technical Memorandum for the
Assessment of Noise from Places other than Domestic Premises, Public Places or
Construction Sites. The criteria for
noise transmitted primarily through the structural elements of the building or
buildings should be 10dB(A) less than the relevant acceptable noise level.
Road Traffic Noise
4.1.3.2
The criteria for assessing road traffic noise is given in the TM-EIAO
and tabulated in Table 4.6. For
domestic premises, hotels, hostels and offices, the criterion is 70dB(A). For
educational institutes and places of worship, the criterion is 65dB(A). For
hospitals, clinics etc, a more stringent criterion of 55dB(A) is
stipulated. It should be noted that all
these criteria only apply to NSRs that rely on opened windows for ventilation.
In addition, reference has been made on EIAO Guidance Note No. 12/2010 on “Road
Traffic Noise Impact under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance”.
Fixed Noise Sources
4.1.3.3
Operational noise from fixed noise sources is controlled under the NCO’s
TM on TM-Places. To plan for a better environment, the TM-EIAO has specified
the following requirements for the planed fixed noise sources, whichever is
more stringent.
·
5dB(A) below the appropriate ANLs in the
TM-Places; or
·
the prevailing background noise levels.
4.1.3.4
Besides, ANL stipulated in the TM-Places will be adopted in the
evaluation of potential cumulative fixed noise impact assessment from existing
and planned fixed noise sources. This approach has been adopted in the approved
3RS EIA (AEIAR-185/2014) and Lamma Power Station Units L4 & L5 Flue Gas
Desulphurization Plan Retrofit Project (AEIAR-098/2006).
4.1.3.5
The ANLs for different Area Sensitivity Ratings during different periods
are summarised in the following table.
Table 4.7 ANLs for fixed noise sources
Time Period |
ANL, dB(A) |
||
Area Sensitivity Rating A |
Area Sensitivity Rating B |
Area Sensitivity Rating C |
|
Day (0700 to 1900 hours) |
60 |
65 |
70 |
Evening (1900 to 2300 hours) |
60 |
65 |
70 |
Night (2300 to 0700 hours) |
50 |
55 |
60 |
4.1.3.6
For assessing
fixed noise sources, the Area Sensitivity Ratings at the NSRs are defined in
accordance with the relevant TMs. More details are discussed in Section 4.2.4.
Aircraft Noise
4.1.3.7
The noise
criterion for aircraft noise is given in Table
4.6. For aircraft noise, NSRs should be planned beyond the NEF25 contour,
except for offices which should be beyond the NEF30 contour. Similar to the
road traffic noise, all these criteria only apply to NSRs relying on opened windows
for ventilation.
Rail Airborne Noise
4.1.3.8
The noise
criterion for assessing rail airborne noise is given in Table 4.6. In addition,
noise level during the period between 11:00pm and 7:00am of the following day
should not exceed Lmax 85dB(A). Similar to road traffic noise
assessment, all these criteria only apply to NSRs relying on opened windows for
ventilation. More details on Area Sensitivity Rating are discussed in Section 4.2.4.
Rail Groundborne Noise
4.1.3.9
The noise criterion for
assessing rail groundborne noise is given in Table 4.6. The
TM-Places under the NCO stipulates that noise transmitted primarily through the
structural elements of building, or buildings, shall be 10dB(A) less than the
relevant ANLs.
4.1.3.10
The ANLs for different Area Sensitivity Ratings during different periods
are summarised in the following table. More details are
discussed in Section 4.2.4.
Table
4.8 ANLs for railway groundborne noise sources
Time Period |
ANL, dB(A) |
||
Area Sensitivity Rating A |
Area Sensitivity Rating B |
Area Sensitivity Rating C |
|
Day (0700 to 1900 hours) |
50 |
55 |
60 |
Evening (1900 to 2300 hours) |
50 |
55 |
60 |
Night (2300 to 0700 hours) |
40 |
45 |
50 |
Helicopter Noise
4.1.3.11
As discussed in Table 4.6, for helicopter noise between
0700 – 1900, NSRs should be planned beyond having noise impacts not exceeding Lmax
85dB(A), except for offices which should be exposed to noise impacts not
exceeding Lmax 90dB(A). Similar to the road traffic noise, all these
criteria only apply to NSRs relying on opened windows for ventilation.
4.1.3.12 It should however be noted
that, other than the daytime noise criterion of Lmax 85dB(A) for
residential premises and 90dB(A) for offices as discussed in Table 4.6, there are no statutory noise
criteria for helicopter noise during both evening period (i.e. 1900 – 2300) and
night-time period (i.e. 2300 – 0700).
4.1.3.13 For the area in Tung Chung
in particular, the helicopters operated by both Government
Flying Services
(GFS) and commercial company would be using the airspace in the vicinity. GFS has a headquarters within the Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA)
and its helicopters serve both routine and emergency services. According to the latest information, all the
routine services (including flying support for all bureau and departments)
would be conducted during daytime period only while emergency services
(including air ambulance, Search & Rescue (SAR), supporting law enforcement
agencies, fire fighting) have to be conducted on an as-required basis to suit
actual circumstances. More details of
the operation of GFS are given in Section
4.2.
4.1.3.14 HKBAC is a helicopter landing services company providing a facility for commercial helicopters to use. According to HKBAC’s latest information, there had only been 2 flight events between HKIA and Macau, and another 2 flights between HKIA and Kowloon in Year 2011 during daytime period.
4.1.3.15 It can therefore be seen from the above paragraphs that there would be helicopter events in Tung Chung area for both evening and night-time periods. Whist there are no statutory helicopter noise criteria for evening and night-time periods, a review on both local and international practice has been conducted to determine an appropriate approach to address the helicopter noise impacts during these periods.
4.1.3.16 A review of all the approved EIA Reports under the EIAO has revealed that there are at least 5 projects involving helicopter noise assessment, including the following:
·
Expansion of Heliport
Facilities at Macau Ferry Terminal (AEIAR-095/2006);
· Helipad at Yung Shue Wan, Lamma Island (AEIAR-094/2006);
· Peng Chau Helipad (AEIAR-087/2005);
·
Kai Tak Development (AEIAR-130/2009);
and
· North East New Territories New Development Areas (NENT NDA) (AEIAR-175/2013).
4.1.3.17 For the Expansion of Heliport Facilities at Macau Ferry Terminal (AEIAR-095/2006), an additional helipad is added to the existing facilities. Its operation involves only commercial helicopter events commuting between HK and Macau serving only both daytime and evening periods, and there are no night-time flight events. This EIA adopted the statutory Lmax 85dB(A) for residential premises and Lmax 90dB(A) for offices during the daytime period. For the evening period between 1900 – 2300 however, it adopted a non-statutory Leq (4 hours) 65dB(A) for its commercial flight events, which was based on existing noise measurements at NSRs locations. It should be noted that all the helicopter flight events in this group of helipad facilities are not for emergency services.
4.1.3.18 For the Helipad at Yung Shue Wan in Lamma Island (AEIAR-094/2006), there had been no permanent, dedicated helipad serving the local community. The community was using the helipad at The Hong Kong Electric Co. Ltd’s Lamma Power Station at a distance of 2.75km with around 20 minutes by mini-ambulance from the North Lamma Clinic. And then a temporary helipad had been operated at Yung Shue Wan since October 2003 pending the construction of a permanent helipad to serve the local community. Its operation is solely for emergency uses such as Casualty Evacuation (CASEVAC) operations, transporting residents for medical treatment. The statutory Lmax 85dB(A) noise criterion is adopted for daytime period. The approved EIA does not propose criteria at night time for emergency uses.
4.1.3.19 For the Helipad at Peng Chau (AEIAR-087/2005), the original Peng Chau helipad was located on a soccer pitch near Tai Lung Tsuen and was subsequently relocated to Pak Wan, northwest Peng Chau. Its operation is solely for emergency uses such as CASEVAC operations, transporting residents for medical treatment. Only the statutory Lmax 85dB(A) noise criterion is adopted for daytime period. The approved EIA does not propose criteria at night time for emergency uses.
4.1.3.20 For the helipad at Kai Tak, it is used for cross-boundary tourism industry according to Kai Tak Development (AEIAR-130/2009) and is located at the tip of the former Kai Tak Airport runway. This helipad is for commercial use and hence is not intended for emergency uses. Only the statutory Lmax 85dB(A) noise criterion is adopted for the daytime period.
4.1.3.21 The Lo Wu Classification Range at Tai Shek Mo is used for fire fighting and police training according to NENT NDA (AEIAR-175/2013). Training will normally be 0700 – 1900 with only one helicopter and the duration of training normally lasted for one and a half hours. Only the statutory Lmax 85dB(A) noise criterion is adopted for the daytime period.
4.1.3.22 Besides the review on approved EIAs under the EIAO, an international review has also been conducted on international practice. The review includes Federal Aviation Administration “Nonmilitary helicopter urban noise study” December 2004, British Helicopter Association “Helicopter flights in urban areas”, Environment Committee “London in a spin – a review of helicopter noise”, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs “Research into the Improvement of the management of helicopter noise” June 2008, International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), “Noise Control Guidelines” October 2008 etc.
4.1.3.23 From the “Noise Control Guidelines” published by Environment Protection Authority of Victoria, the maximum free field noise level should not exceed 82dB(A) between 0700 – 2200 (i.e. a façade noise limit of 85dB(A)). Operation hours outside 0700 – 2200 is not permitted except for emergency flight. In addition, the reports (including Nonmilitary helicopter urban noise study, Helicopter flights in urban areas, London in a spin – a review of helicopter noise, research into the improvement of the management of helicopter noise) noted that “the public expressed supported for exemption from noise restriction alternatives for services in performance of emergency operations” and FAA-hosted workshops was the mutual agreement among public and industry participants that emergency helicopter service (air medical, law enforcement, fire-fighting, public services, etc) should be exempted from any proposed limitation or restrictions considered by Congress following this study. These services are time-critical and provide a noise-excusable public service.” This situation applies to the evening and night-time operation for CASEVAC, SAR, fire fighting, law enforcement and emergency training.
4.1.3.24 To summarise the findings regarding noise criteria for emergency
helicopter services in Hong Kong during evening and night-time periods, there
has been no statutory noise criteria for these periods. This is also consistent
with the findings from the review on international practice given the need and
nature of emergency services, air medical, law enforcement, fire-fighting,
public services, etc.
Marine
Traffic Noise
4.1.3.25
There is no
statutory requirement for marine traffic noise. Additional non-statutory noise
criteria beyond the NCO may therefore need to be considered. An approach to
establish the noise criterion based on the prevailing noise measurement had
been adopted in approved EIA report (AEIAR-070/2003) for the Proposed Joint
User Complex and Wholesale Fish Market at Area 44, Tuen Mun. Similar approach
has been adopted for the marine traffic noise assessment. Similar to road
traffic noise assessment, all these criteria only apply to NSRs relying on opened
windows for ventilation.
4.2
Description of the
Noise Environment
4.2.1
Existing
Environment
4.2.1.1
As discussed in Section 1, the Possible Development Areas (PDAs) consist of
2 parts including the TCE and TCW as shown in Figure 1.1. TCE is located north to the reclamation area near
Ying Hei Road and is currently a sea area. The existing noise climate is
dominated by the road traffic from Ying Hei Road and NLH, Airport Express Line
(AEL), Tung Chung Line (TCL), aircraft approaching and departing from HKIA and
helicopter holding and transiting.
4.2.1.2
TCW is located at
the existing scattered villages of Ma Wan Chung, Sha Tsui Tau, Ngau Au, Shek
Lau Po, Shek Mun Kap, etc. The noise climate is dominated by aircraft
approaching and departing from HKIA and helicopter holding and transiting. TCW
is relatively tranquil and only relatively minor traffic is observed on Yu Tung
Road and Tung Chung Road.
4.2.2
Existing and
Planned Noise Sources
Existing Noise Sources
4.2.2.1
The area for noise
impact assessment shall generally include all areas within 300m from the boundary
of TCE, TCW and the associated infrastructure. Individual assessment area for
fixed plant noise and marine traffic noise will be discussed in the respective
sections. Table 4.9 shows the key
existing noise sources and their locations are illustrated in Figure 4.1.
Table 4.9 List of key existing noise sources
Types |
Noise Sources |
Reference Location[1] |
Existing Noise
Sources |
Road Traffic from Existing NLH |
ENS01 |
AEL and TCL |
ENS02 / ENS03 |
|
Public Pier in Tung Chung |
ENS04 / ENS05 |
|
Ngong Ping Skyrail Tung Chung Terminal |
ENS06 |
|
North Lantau Hospital |
ENS07 |
|
Tung Chung Town Electric Substation |
ENS08 |
|
Helicopter Operations to/ from HKIA |
ENS09 |
|
Existing Activities within HKIA with Two Runway System |
ENS10 |
|
Tung Chung Fire Station |
ENS11 |
|
Sewage Pumping Station |
ENS12 |
Notes:
[1] Reference source no. is
shown in Figure 4.1.
4.2.2.2
The nature and operation of these noise
sources are described as follows.
North Lantau Highway (NLH)
4.2.2.3 NLH is a highway linking HKIA, Lantau Island and Tsing Ma Bridge. It has an Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) of 50,000 in Year 2013 and is an expressway with three lanes in each direction for its entire length, and with a speed limit of 110km/h for the section near Tung Chung. Some sections of the NLH near Tung Chung have also been installed with vertical noise barriers and friction course material. These existing vertical noise barriers have an approximate height of 3m and an extent of about 540m, as illustrated in Figure 4.2. Potential road traffic noise impacts have therefore been addressed in this noise assessment.
AEL and TCL
4.2.2.4 Similar to NLH, AEL is located at south of TCE (Figure 4.1). According to the railway operator’s website, the existing headway for AEL is 10 minutes during peak hour and 12 minutes during non-peak hour and the maximum operating speed is about 135 km/h. TCL generally runs along AEL and it terminates at Tung Chung Station. The headway of TCL is approximately 4 minutes during peak hour and approximately 12 minutes during non-peak hour.
4.2.2.5 For the section to the east of TCE near Pak Mong, both the AEL and TCL share common tracks which are on ballast and there are neither barriers nor other existing screening structures. For the section between Caribbean Coast and Pak Mong, it bifurcates into 2 sets of ballast tracks. For the section to the west of TCE, the TCL enters into a tunnel portal near the Hei Tung street oil station while AEL continues as at-grade with a semi-enclosure between the tracks and TCE as shown in Figure 4.2. The shortest distance between the tracks and planned NSRs A1-1 at TCE (Figure 4.1a) is about 100m. Potential rail airborne noise impacts have therefore been addressed in this noise assessment.
Public Pier in Tung Chung
4.2.2.6
A public pier in Tung Chung is located at
north of Seaview Crescent. Although the public pier is located at approximately
980m west of the nearest planned NSRs D1-1 at TCE (Figure 4.1a) and 900m east of the nearest planned
NSRs TCW-2 at TCW (Figure 4.1b), the pier serves ferries commuting
between Tuen Mun, Tung Chung, Sha Lo Wan and Tai O, and the route is
approximately 120m north of planned NSRs E3-1 and E3-2 at TCE (Figure 4.1a). Marine
traffic noise impacts have therefore been addressed in this noise assessment.
Ngong Ping Skyrail Tung Chung
Terminal
4.2.2.7 Ngong Ping Skyrail Tung Chung Terminal is located at the junction of Mei Tung Street and Tat Tung Road. It serves as the terminal to connect north coast of Lantau (Po Lin Monastery and Tian Tan Buddha) and Tung Chung rail line. The terminal is located at approximately 1300m west of planned NSRs D1-1 at TCE (Figure 4.1a) and 450m east of planned NSRs TCW-2 at TCW (Figure 4.1b). Given the large separation distance, fixed noise impacts are therefore not anticipated.
North Lantau Hospital
4.2.2.8 North Lantau Hospital is located at the junction of Chung Yan Road and Yu Tung Road. It would accommodate outdoor noise sources such as air-cooled chillers, cooling tower, ventilation louvers, etc. As the hospital site is located at approximately 140m south of planned NSRs TCW-2 at TCW (Figure 4.1b), fixed noise impacts have therefore been addressed in this noise assessment.
Tung Chung Town
Electric Substation
4.2.2.9 Tung Chung Town Electric Substation is located at the junction of Shun Tung Road, Tung Chung Waterfront Road and Chek Lap Kok South Road. The substation is located at approximately 1600m west of planned NSRs D1-1 at TCE (Figure 4.1a) and 350m north of planned NSRs TCW-2 at TCW (Figure 4.1b). Given the large separation distance, fixed noise impacts are therefore not anticipated.
Helicopter Operations
to/ from HKIA
4.2.2.10 GFS and HKBAC are located at the south-western of the HKIA. GFS accommodates a total of seven helicopters (Super Puma AS332 L2 and EC 155 B1) which are mainly used for search and rescue, air ambulance, tactical police support, lifting loads and internal cargo, airborne monitoring, the carriage of government passengers. HKBAC provides a venue for business operation of the helicopters landing at HKIA including MD 902 Explorer, AgustaWestland AW139, Sikorsky S-76 and Sikorsky S-92A. Both the GFS and HKBAC are located at approximately 4km west and 3 km northwest from the planned NSRs at TCE and TCW respectively. Hence, noise impact generated from helicopter approaching, take-off and manoeuvring are not anticipated.
4.2.2.11 The operation parameters of GFS and HKBAC are given in the table below.
Table
4.9a Helicopter operation parameters
Operation Parameters |
HKBAC[1] |
GFS |
Nature of Use |
Business |
Government |
Operation Time |
[2] |
24 hours |
Operation Frequency |
[1] |
Routine and emergency [3] |
Helicopter Types |
·
MD902 Explorer
helicopter ·
AgustaWestland
AW139 ·
Sikorsky S-76 ·
Sikorsky S-92A |
·
Eurocopter AS332 L2
(Super Puma AS332 L2) helicopters ·
Eurocopter EC155 B1
(EC155) helicopters |
Notes:
[1] Information provided by Hong Kong Business
Aviation Centre (HKBAC). According to the approved 3RS EIA (AEIAR-185/2014),
there were average two flights going to Macau and 2 flights going to Kowloon
per month in Year 2011.
[2] According to AIC 20 / 11 16 December 2011,
operators are recommended to apply time slots during the off-peak periods (0700
– 1000 and 1700 – 1800) and subject to the approval from HKIA. In addition,
Civil Aviation Department has confirmed that permission will not be granted to
commercial helicopters for regulation at HKIA during evening and night time
periods.
[3] Routine and emergency tasks
will be discussed in the following section.
4.2.2.12 As seen from Table 4.9a, all the business helicopter
and routine tasks by GFS will be operated during daytime period. GFS’s main duty is to provide emergency services to Hong Kong, South
China Sea and
fulfil international rescue obligations. Their major types of services are
listed as below:
· Air ambulance
GFS provides a 24-hour air ambulance service for patients in the outlying islands to receive immediate medical treatment in hospitals. GFS has a 20-minute services pledge for locations within Island Zone such as Hong Kong Island, Cheung Chau, Hei Ling Chau, Lantau, Peng Chau and Soko Islands, and 30 minutes for elsewhere within the Hong Kong territory. This accounts for the time that GFS receives emergency callouts from clinics throughout the territory to the arrival time on-scene.
· Search & Rescue (SAR)
One of the major responsibilities of the GFS lies with SAR operations, e.g. injured hikers and vessels in distress. The area of responsibility covers Hong Kong SAR, the majority of the South China Sea up to 700 nautical miles (1300 km) south of Hong Kong.
· Supporting law enforcement agencies
The Hong Kong Police Force makes frequent use of GFS’s helicopters in operations such as anti-smuggling, anti-illegal immigrations, anti-drug trafficking, movement of personnel and traffic monitoring.
· Fire fighting
One of the two types of helicopters own by the GFS, the Super Puma AS332 L2 is used for countryside fire suppression operations. In addition to the standard fire bucket system, these helicopters can also be fitted with a ‘belly tank' with its own suction pump and fire foam delivery system to enhance the fire fighting capability.
4.2.2.13 Other than the above emergency services, GFS also provides flying support to all Bureaux and Departments in the HKSAR. The more frequent ones are flying support for Lands Department to conduct aerial survey, transporting personnel of Home Affairs Department, Marine Department, Civil Aviation Department and Information Services Department for their operations; transporting Chief Executive and visiting foreign officials for visits in Hong Kong.
4.2.2.14 As discussed above, there are routine services provided by GFS during daytime period. During evening and night time periods, however, only emergency services would be provided. Their operation statistics are given in the table below:
Table
4.9b Pass year operation statistics (in Trips)
Year |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
Average |
Total No. of Flight Trips |
3518 |
3801 |
4129 |
4311 |
4251 |
4002 |
No. of Routine Trips[1], [2] |
1246 |
1317 |
1345 |
1348 |
1330 |
1317 |
Total No. of Flight Trips between 1900 – 2300 |
450 |
485 |
511 |
573 |
594 |
584 |
Total No. of Flight Trips between 2300 - 0700 |
365 |
415 |
398 |
436 |
425 |
404 |
No. of Emergency Trips[2] – CASEVAC, SAR Fire Fighting, Law Enforcement |
||||||
No. of Casualty evacuation (CASEVAC) |
1702 |
1823 |
2100 |
2247 |
2133 |
2001 |
No. of SAR |
411 |
391 |
492 |
496 |
567 |
471 |
No. of Fire Fighting |
62 |
145 |
70 |
76 |
72 |
85 |
No. of Law Enforcement |
97 |
125 |
122 |
144 |
149 |
127 |
% of Emergency Trips |
65 |
65 |
68 |
69 |
69 |
67 |
% of Routine Trips |
35 |
35 |
33 |
31 |
31 |
33 |
Daily Average No. of Flight Trips |
9.6 |
10.4 |
11.3 |
11.8 |
11.6 |
10.9 |
Daily Average No. of Trips for Routine Trips |
3.4 |
3.6 |
3.7 |
3.7 |
3.6 |
3.6 |
Daily Average No. of Trips for Emergency Trips |
6.2 |
6.8 |
7.6 |
8.1 |
8.0 |
7.3 |
Daily Average No. of Trips for Emergency Trips between 1900 – 2300 |
1.2 |
1.3 |
1.4 |
1.6 |
1.6 |
1.4 |
Daily Average No. of Trips for Emergency Trips between 2300 - 0700 |
1.0 |
1.1 |
1.1 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.1 |
Note:
[1] All the routine trips would
be conducted between 0700 – 1900.
[2] According to Section II
Rule 5 (3) of Air Navigation (Hong Kong) Order 1995, it is stated that “Nothing
in this Rule shall prohibit an aircraft from flying in such a manner as is
necessary for the purpose of fire fighting or prevention, life-saving or law
enforcement operations and including the training of personnel engaged in such
activities”. Therefore, CASEVAC, SAR, fire fighting, law enforcement and
training are considered as necessary and essential in achieving emergency duty.
4.2.2.15 It can be seen from Table 4.9b that, according to the statistics between 2010 and 2014, there are average of about 4 daily routine tasks between 0700 – 1900 while of about 7 emergency tasks in one day such as CASEVAC, SAR, fire fighting, etc. In addition, out of 7 emergency tasks, there was on average only one emergency operation between 1900 and 2300 (i.e. evening) and between 2300 and 0700 (i.e. night time period) respectively, and the flight direction would be either eastward or westward depending on the destination and needs of the emergency tasks. Only those eastward flight would fly closer to Tung Chung Area and those westward flight would closer to Sha Lo Wan.
4.2.2.16 The helicopter holding and transiting in the helicopter holding areas near Cathay City and Tung Chung Bay may generate helicopter noise, helicopter noise impacts have therefore been addressed in this noise assessment.
Existing Activities within HKIA
with Two Runway System
4.2.2.17 According to the website of HKIA, HKIA is connected to about 180 destinations in 2014, including 45 in the Mainland, through over 1,000 daily flights by more than 100 airlines. The minimum separation distance from the southern runway of the airport is about 1.8km and 2km from planned NSRs D1-1 at TCE (Figure 4.1a) and TCW-2 at TCW (Figure 4.1b) respectively.
4.2.2.18 According to the approved 3RS EIA (AEIAR-185/2014), the NEF noise contours for the existing two runway option in year 2011 based on operational records and daily radar data is shown in Figure 4.3a and 4.3b. Based on this information, the NEF 25 contour in year 2011 will encroach onto the reclamation boundary at TCE but away from all the existing residential premises in Tung Chung such as Ma Wan Chung, Yat Tung Estate, Fung Tung Estate, etc. However, the existing two runway option will be expanded to three runway system, and more details have been discussed in Section 4.7.
Tung Chung Fire Station
4.2.2.19 Tung Chung Fire Station is located at the junction of Shun Tung Road and Yu Tung Road to provide emergency service for the communities in the vicinity. Noise sources from the station operations include loudspeakers, siren, fire engine sirens, etc. These noise may cause potential nuisance to the nearby planned NSRs, despite their occurrences are on an as-needed basis and last for short duration only. In addition, the operation of a fire station also require certain fixed noise sources such as condenser, transformer, etc. As the station is located at about 1.5km from planned NSRs D1-1 at TCE (Figure 4.1a), potential nuisance and fixed noise impacts on TCE are not anticipated due to the large distance attenuation of about 70dB(A). At TCW, the station is at about 300m from the nearest planned NSRs TCW-2 (Figure 4.1b), which is equivalent to a distance attenuation of about 55 dB(A). Besides, there is also a terrain (maximum 75mPD) in between the planned NSRs TCW-2 (75mPD) and the existing fire station, which would provide screening effect to the planned NSRs. On this basis, potential nuisance and fixed noise impacts on the TCW are therefore not anticipated.
Sewage Pumping Station
4.2.2.20
A sewage pumping station is located at the junction of
Shun Tung Road and Yat Tung Street. As the pumping station is located at
approximately 70m south of planned NSRs TCW-2 at TCW (Figure 4.1b), fixed noise impacts have therefore been addressed in this noise
assessment.
Planned Noise Sources
4.2.2.21
Other than the key existing noise sources
within 300m from the boundary of TCE, TCW and associated infrastructure, there
are planned noise sources which may give rise to potential impacts on existing
and future NSRs. They are listed in the table below and their locations are
shown in Figure 4.1.
Table 4.10 List of key planned noise sources
Types |
Noise Sources |
Land Lot Nos. |
Reference Location[1] |
Possible Future Noise
Sources from Project |
Salt Water
Pumping Station / Sewage Pumping Station / Pumping Station |
D0-1, C0-4 at
TCE TCV-a, TCV-c,
TCV-e at TCW |
PNS01 |
Fire Station |
G0-3 at TCE |
PNS02 |
|
Electric
Substation |
B0-2 at TCE |
PNS03 |
|
Public
Transport Interchange (PTI) |
C2-2, A1-2, |
PNS04 |
|
Road P1
Extension |
- |
PNS05 |
|
Internal Roads |
- |
PNS06 |
|
Chung Mun Road
Sewage Pumping Station |
- |
PNS07 |
|
Planned
Service Reservoirs near TCW |
- |
PNS08 |
|
Sewerage
Network |
- |
PNS09 |
|
Possible
Future Noise Sources by others |
Marina |
F0-5 at TCE |
CNS01/ CNS02 |
Sports Ground |
G0-1 at TCE |
CNS03 |
|
Ventilation
Building for HKLR (being implemented)[2] |
- |
CNS04 |
|
HKLR (being
implemented)[2] |
- |
CNS05 |
|
TM-CL Link
(being implemented)[2] |
- |
CNS06 |
|
HKBCF (being
implemented)[2] |
- |
CNS07 |
|
Expansion of
HKIA into a Three-Runway System (3RS) |
- |
CNS08 |
|
Proposed Pier
for the Three-Runway System (3RS) of HKIA |
- |
CNS09 |
|
Railway
Stations at Tung Chung East and Tung Chung West |
- |
CNS10/ CNS11 |
|
Construction
of additional sewage rising mains and rehabilitation of the existing sewage
rising main between Tung Chung and Siu Ho Wan |
- |
CNS12 |
|
Planned
developments in the existing Tung Chung New Town such as residential
developments at Tung Chung Area 27, Area 39, Area 54, Area 55, Area 56 and
hotel development at Tung Chung Area 53a |
- |
CNS13 |
Notes:
[1] Reference source no. is shown in Figure 4.1.
[2] According to AEIAR-144/2009 Hong
Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road, AEIAR-145/2009 Hong
Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hone Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities and AEIAR-146/2009
Tuen Mun-Chek Lap Kok Link.
4.2.2.22
The nature and operation of these noise sources are described as
follows.
Sewage Pumping Station / Salt Water
Pumping Station / Pumping Station
4.2.2.23
Six Sewage Pumping stations / Salt Water Pumping Stations are planned at TCE (B0-4, C0-4 and D0-1) (Figure 4.1a) and TCW (TCV-b, TCV-d and TCV-f) (Figure 4.1b) to cater for the demand increase
in water supply and sewage load. These pumping stations would need to be
operated during daytime, evening time and night-time periods. The sewage
pumping station / salt water pumping station will be located at 5m and 80m from
the Reclamation Area next to TCE (N3) and Shek Lau Po (N2-6) respectively. In
addition, the pumping stations are located within TCE and TCW. Hence, the
associated construction noise and fixed noise impacts have been
addressed in this noise assessment.
4.2.2.24
Three Pumping Stations are planned at TCW (TCV-a, TCV-c and TCV-e) (Figure 4.1b) to
discharge the treated runoff from the stormwater attenuation and treatment
ponds to drainage network. These pumping stations would need to be operated
during daytime, evening time and night-time periods. These pumping stations will
be located at about 10m and 20m
from the nearest planned NSR at TCV-1 and Shek Lau Po (N2-6)
respectively. Hence,
the associated construction noise and fixed noise impacts have been
addressed in this noise assessment.
Fire Station
4.2.2.25
A fire station (G0-3) (Figure 4.1a) is proposed in
the south-eastern part of TCE to provide emergency service for the future community. Noise
sources from the station operations include loudspeakers, siren, fire engine
sirens, etc. In addition, the operation of a fire station also require certain
fixed noise sources such as condenser, transformer, etc. These noise may be
potential nuisance to the nearby NSRs, despite their occurrences are on as-needed basis and last for short
duration only.
4.2.2.26
The nearest NSRs are the
planned Police Married Quarters (C0-2) at TCE (Figure 4.1a) and the planned Post Secondary Institution (G0-2) at TCE (Figure 4.1a), with separation distances of about 80m and 30m respectively. These separation distance of 80m and 30m would have
provided a sound attenuation of about 46dB(A) and 37dB(A)
according to standard point source correction. The operational noise from fire station could also
be masked to a certain extent by the road traffic noise from NLH. Other form to
reduce the nuisance should be adopted including special systems like green-wave
system / hurry call system. In addition, the planned
Police Married Quarters (C0-2) has been designed to have all the openable
window facing north to enjoy a better view and the Post Secondary Institution (G0-2)
at TCE (Figure 4.1a) is unlikely to have school activities during night-time period and will not rely on opened windows for
ventilation. Thus, potential nuisance has
been minimised as much as practicable.
4.2.2.27 Further away from the above NSRs, the next nearest NSRs would be the planned residential premises (C2-1) located at TCE (Figure 4.1a) which is approximately 150m away from the station. These residential premises are partially screened by planned commercial buildings in COM-3 and Police Married Quarters (C0-2) (Figure 4.1a). In addition, the proposed fire station is located at 1.5km from the existing NSRs Caribbean Coast (N29). Thus, potential nuisance has been minimised as much as practicable. However, the associated construction noise and fixed noise (such as chillers, condensers, etc) impacts have been addressed in this noise assessment.
Electric Substation
4.2.2.28 Noise sources within electric substation (B0-2) (Figure 4.1a) consist of transformers (132/11KV) and necessary ventilation system. The electric substation is located at 100m from planned NSRs B1-2 at TCE (Figure 4.1a); and 80m from existing NSRs of Reclamation Area next to Tung Chung East (N3). Hence, the associated construction noise and fixed noise impacts have been addressed in this noise assessment.
Public Transport Interchange (PTI)
4.2.2.29 Four public transport interchanges (C2-2, A1-2, B1-1 at TCE and COM-3 at TCW) (Figure 4.1a and 4.1b) are proposed inside TCE and TCW. Key noise generating sources inside PTI usually include ventilation fans, idling engine and manoeuvring vehicles, etc. However, the PTI would be decked under proposed building structures and designed with no line-of-sight at the noise sensitive use and therefore their noise emissions are adequately controlled. In addition, the location of ingress and egress of the facilities should be planned in order to avoid adverse noise impacts to the adjacent area in detail design stage. However, the associated fixed noise impacts from ventilation fans and construction noise impacts have been addressed in this noise assessment.
Planned Road P1 Extension
4.2.2.30
The Road P1 extension with road speed 50km/h is a planned road located
along the southern boundary of TCE and will continue from Ying Hei Road
and stretch further east at TCE. Reclamation Area next to TCE (N3) are located
at the western end of Road P1.
4.2.2.31
Road P1 would be further extended to Tai Ho. Different
construction methodology options have been considered (see Section 2.7). Despite this, the alignment would be similar and the
nearest existing NSR for that portion of Road P1 extension are the village
houses in Pak Mong at
the eastern end. According to the site
inspection, the nearest separation distance from the
existing NSRs at Pak Mong from Road P1 is about 400m and the natural topography
has provided some screening and absorption. Hence, adverse road traffic noise
impacts from Road P1 on Pak Mong are not anticipated. However, road traffic noise impacts on existing, committed and planned NSRs have been addressed in this noise assessment. In addition, the associated
construction noise impacts have also been assessed.
Planned Internal Roads
4.2.2.32
Internal roads have been planned inside both TCE
and TCW to facilitate
the transportation after population intake. The associated construction noise
and road traffic noise impacts have been addressed in this noise assessment.
Chung Mun Road Sewage Pumping Station
4.2.2.33
The existing Chung Mun Road
Sewage Pumping Station will be upgraded from existing capacity of 12,360m3/day
to a proposed capacity of approximately 20,660m3/day. This Sewage
Pumping Station is located at Chung Mun Road adjacent to TCW, and is at 30m
from the planned NSRs TCV-1 at TCW (Figure 4.1b) and 180m from existing NSRs YMCA of Hong Kong
Christian College (N14). Hence, fixed noise impacts have been addressed in this
noise assessment.
Planned Service Reservoirs at the east
of the TCW
4.2.2.34
Two service reservoirs, including one for fresh water and the other for
flushing water are proposed about 350m at the east of the TCW to cater for the
demand increase in water supply. The planned service reservoirs will be located at 90m from the existing
Chek Lap Kwok New Village (N22) and at 130m from Sheung Ling Pei (N10)
respectively. It is
informed that there is no water pump installed in both fresh water and flushing
water service reservoirs. The service reservoir, which locates on hillsides,
only serves as a temporary storage for the fresh water and flushing water and
will discharge the water to communities through water mains. In addition, water
mains will be constructed and connected to the existing water mains system.
Considering the small work scale of the water mains work, only the associated
construction noise of service reservoirs have therefore been
addressed in this noise assessment.
Sewerage network
4.2.2.35
A new sewerage network independent from the existing sewerage network is
proposed to avoid impacts to existing gravity sewers. This sewerage network has
been planned inside both TCE and TCW and extended along Yu Tung Road and the
maintenance access road north of Siu Ho Wan Depot to Siu Ho Wan Sewage
Treatment Works. The
associated construction noise impacts have been addressed in this noise
assessment.
Marina
4.2.2.36 A marina basin with moorings and supplies for yachts and small boats (a total of 95 berths) has been planned at the northern tip of the TCE. While the land formation of this marina would be carried out as part of the reclamation process, the operation will be further determined by future marina operator. The construction (except the land formation) and operation of the marina is a separate Schedule 2 DP and are not under scope of this Project. As the proposed marina is located at 120m north of planned NSRs F2-1 at TCE (Figure 4.1a), the associated construction noise and marine traffic noise impacts have therefore been addressed in this noise assessment.
4.2.2.37
There is a boatyard and
maintenance area for the yachts located at F0-5 (Figure 4.1a). This area will
provide minor maintenance works. The boatyard and maintenance area is located at 140m from the planned
NSRs F2-1 at TCE (Figure 4.1a). Hence, the associated fixed noise and construction noise impacts have therefore been
addressed in this noise assessment.
4.2.2.38
As the proposed marina is considered as a Designated
Project under Item O.2 of Schedule 2 of TM-EIAO, a separate EIA study would be
conducted by the future operator to fulfil all the statutory requirements and
procedures under the EIAO.
Sports Ground
4.2.2.39
A sports ground (G0-1) with a capacity to accommodate
more than 10,000 persons is planned at east of the TCE. While the land formation of this marina would be carried out as part of
the reclamation process, the operation will be further decided by future operator. The
construction (except the land formation) and operation of the sports ground are
not under scope of this Project. Noise from operation of the facility and
public address (PA) system are anticipated. The sports
ground is located at 50m from the nearest planned NSRs School (C0-1) at TCE (Figure 4.1a). Since the school will be using central air-conditioning system, it
will not rely on opened windows for ventilation. Another planned NSRs
residential buildings (C2-2), with a separation distance of about 120m is
therefore assessed. Hence, the associated construction noise and noise from
operation of the facility have therefore been addressed in this noise
assessment.
4.2.2.40
Should the sports ground is designed to accommodate
more than 10,000 people, it will be classified as a DP under Item O.7 of Schedule 2
of TM-EIAO, a separate EIA study would be conducted by the future operator to
fulfil all the statutory requirements and procedures under the EIAO.
Ventilation building for HKLR (Being
implemented)
4.2.2.41 According to the approved EIA report for HKLR (AEIAR-144/2009), a tunnel ventilation building will be located at south of Scenic Hill. The shortest separation between the TCW-2 at TCW and the ventilation building will be about 850m. The EIA report for HKLR (AEIAR-144/2009) had estimated the maximum allowable Sound Power Level (SWL) for the ventilation building to be 110dB(A) for daytime and 104dB(A) for night time respectively. Given the large distance attenuation of about 65dB(A), fixed noise impacts are therefore not anticipated. However, the cumulative fixed noise impacts from the approved EIA report for 3RS (AEIAR-185/2014) has taken account the associated fixed noise impacts from the ventilation building.
Hong Kong – Zhuhai Macao Bridge
Hong Kong Link Road (HKLR – being implemented)
4.2.2.42
According to the approved EIA report for HKLR (AEIAR-144/2009),
it is a dual-3 carriage way of about 12km in length. For the sections with
speed greater than 100kph, it would be installed with friction course material.
The separation distance between HKLR to the nearest
NSRs D1-1 TCE (Figure 4.1a) and TCW-2 TCW (Figure 4.1b) are 950m and 850m respectively. Given the large separation distance, potential road traffic noise
impacts are therefore not anticipated. However, the induced traffic due to HKLR
has been taken into account in the traffic forecast for road traffic noise
impact assessments.
Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link (TM-CLK Link – being implemented)
4.2.2.43 According to the approved EIA report for TM-CLKL (AEIAR-146/2009),
the link will provide a direct route linking North West New Territories and
North Lantau. It would run along the north-east and the east side of TCE. The separation
distance between TM-CLKL to the TCE (F1-1, F1-2 and F2-2)
(Figure 4.1a) are 250m. Hence, road traffic noise impacts have therefore been
addressed in this noise assessment.
Hong Kong – Zhuhai – Macao Bridge Hong
Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF – being implemented)
4.2.2.44 According to approved EIA report for HKBCF (AEIAR-145/2009), it will be located at about 2km from the existing Tung Chung Town Centre and about 1.5km from the existing coastline. The separation distances from the north of TCE (F2-2) (Figure 4.1a) and north-east of TCW (TCW-2) (Figure 4.1b) are about 360m and 3km respectively. HKBCF consists of facilities such as passengers clearance building, government departments, public transport interchange, transport drop-off and pick-up areas, water supply system, sewage and drainage systems, utilities, electronic system, traffic control and surveillance system, etc. Hence, fixed noise and road traffic noise impacts are therefore not anticipated.
Expansion of HKIA into a
Three-Runway System (3RS)
4.2.2.45 According to the approved EIA report for 3RS (AEIAR-185/2014), the NEF noise contours at year 2021, 2030 and 2032 have been predicted. The NEFs as published from that approved EIA report are shown in Figures 4.3a and 4.3b. More details will be discussed in Section 4.7.
4.2.2.46 Information on fixed noise impacts including ground running of aircraft, engine run-up facilities (ERUFs), auxiliary power units (APU), etc has been assessed in the approved EIA report for 3RS (AEIAR-185/2014). The assessment area for the fixed noise impacts induced from the operation of three runway system are about 1,300m and 2,800m during day & evening and night time periods respectively. These assessment areas will encroach into the development areas at TCE and TCW. In addition, cumulative fixed noise impacts will be induced to existing NSRs such as Tung Chung Crescent (N4). Hence, cumulative fixed noise impacts have been addressed in this noise assessment. More details will be discussed in Section 4.6. In addition, road traffic with consideration of 3RS operation has been taken into account in the traffic forecast for road traffic noise impact assessments.
Proposed Pier for the Third Runway of
HKIA
4.2.2.47 There will be a proposed SkyPier marine vessel moored to the piers due to operation of planned Third Runway of HKIA according to the approved EIA report for 3RS (AEIAR-185/2014). However, as the assessment area for the manoeuvring route is 1,350m which is more than 1,500m away from the nearest NSRs E3-1 and E3-2 at TCE (Figure 4.1a), cumulative marine traffic noise impacts are therefore not anticipated.
Proposed Railway Stations at TCE
and TCW
4.2.2.48
Railway Stations at TCE and
TCW are proposed at the south of TCE and in the central portion of TCW, and are connected to the existing MTR Tung
Chung Station as shown in Figure 1.1. The
proposed station at TCE would be at-grade and hence airborne train noise, construction
airborne noise and fixed noise have therefore been addressed in this
assessment.
4.2.2.49
For the
proposed station at TCW, both the alignment for the extension from Tung Chung
station and the TCW station would be underground and hence operational air-borne
train noise is not anticipated. Fixed
noise impacts from ventilation building and associated facilities, construction
airborne noise from cut-and-cover station, construction groundborne noise and
operational groundborne noise impacts due to the underground alignment have therefore
been addressed in this assessment.
4.2.2.50 As the proposed Railway Stations at TCE and TCW and its associated railway system is a separate Designated Project under Item A.2 of Schedule 2 of TM-EIAO, a separate study would be conducted by the rail operator to fulfil all the statutory requirements and procedures under the EIAO. Hence, the noise assessment will only be conducted for planned NSRs within the TCE and TCW. The construction (except the land formation of the Railway Station at TCE as part of the reclamation process) and operation of the Railway Stations at TCE and TCW are not under scope of this Project.
Construction of additional sewage rising
mains and rehabilitation of the existing sewage rising main between Tung Chung
and Siu Ho Wan
4.2.2.51 The project includes the 1) construction of an additional 1200 mm diameter sewage rising main, 2) modification of Tung Chung Sewage Pumping Station (TC SPS) and Siu Ho Wan Sewage Treatment Works (SHWSTW), and 3) rehabilitation of the existing 1,200 mm diameter sewage rising main which conveys sewage from HKIA and Tung Chung to SHWSTW. The proposed new rising main is scheduled for commissioning in June 2023, while rehabilitation of the existing rising main is scheduled for completion by end of 2025. Hence, cumulative construction airborne noise has therefore been addressed in this assessment.
Planned developments in the existing
Tung Chung New Town such as residential developments at Tung Chung Area 27,
Area 39, Area 54, Area 55, Area 56 and hotel development at Tung Chung Area 53a
4.2.2.52 As
discussed in Section 1, the
induced traffic will be taken account in the road traffic noise impact
assessment for Tung Chung Area 27, Area 39, Area 54, Area 56 and hotel
development at Tung Chung Area53a. In addition, cumulative construction
airborne noise from Area 27 has also been addressed in this assessment.
Possible Impacts
from Existing and Planned Noise Sources
4.2.2.53 Possible impacts from existing and planned noise sources are summarized in the table below:
Table
4.10a Summary of noise
sources
Summary |
Assessment to be Conducted |
Environmental Noise Impacts Considered |
Existing
Noise Sources |
||
Road Traffic from
Existing NLH |
Y |
Road Traffic Noise |
AEL and TCL |
Y |
Rail Noise |
Public Pier in Tung Chung |
Y |
Marine Traffic Noise |
Ngong Ping
Skyrail Tung Chung Terminal[1] |
N |
- |
North Lantau Hospital |
Y |
Fixed Noise |
Tung Chung
Town Electric Substation[1] |
N |
- |
Helicopter Operations to / from HKIA |
Y |
Helicopter Noise |
Existing Activities
within HKIA with Two Runway System |
Y |
Aircraft Noise, Fixed Noise |
Tung Chung
Fire Station[1] |
N |
- |
Sewage Pumping Station |
Y |
Fixed Noise |
Planned Noise Sources from
Project |
||
Salt Water Pumping
Station / Sewage Pumping Station / Pumping
Station |
Y |
Construction Noise, Fixed
Noise |
Fire Station |
Y |
Construction Noise, Fixed
Noise |
Electric Substation |
Y |
Construction Noise, Fixed
Noise |
Public Transport
Interchange (PTI) |
Y |
Construction Noise, Fixed
Noise |
Road P1 Extension |
Y |
Construction Noise, Road
Traffic Noise |
Internal Roads |
Y |
Construction Noise, Road
Traffic Noise |
Chung Mun Road Sewage
Pumping Station |
Y |
Construction Noise, Fixed
Noise |
Planned Service
Reservoirs near TCW |
Y |
Construction Noise |
Sewerage Network |
Y |
Construction Noise |
Planned Noise Sources by Others |
||
Marina |
Y |
Construction Noise, Fixed
Noise, Marine Traffic Noise |
Sports Ground |
Y |
Construction Noise, Fixed
Noise |
Ventilation
Building for HKLR (being implemented)[1] |
N |
[2] |
HKLR (being
implemented)[1] |
N |
Induced Traffic |
TM-CL Link (being
implemented) |
Y |
Road Traffic Noise |
HKBCF (being
implemented)[1] |
N |
Induced Traffic |
Expansion of HKIA into a
Three-Runway System (3RS) |
Y |
Induced Traffic, Aircraft Noise, Fixed Noise |
Proposed Pier
for the Three-Runway System (3RS) of HKIA[1] |
N |
- |
Railway Stations at Tung
Chung East and Tung Chung West |
Y |
Construction Noise, Rail
Noise, Fixed Noise |
Construction of
additional sewage rising mains and rehabilitation of the existing sewage
rising main between Tung Chung and Siu Ho Wan |
Y |
Construction Noise |
Planned developments in
the existing Tung Chung New Town such as residential developments at Tung Chung
Area 27, Area 39, Area 54, Area 55, Area 56 and hotel development at Tung
Chung Area 53a |
Y |
Construction Noise,
Induced Traffic |
Notes:
[1] Noise
emission is evaluated and adverse noise impact is not anticipated.
[2] The
cumulative fixed noise impacts from the approved EIA report for 3RS
(AEIAR-185/2014) has taken account the associated fixed noise impacts from the
ventilation building.
4.2.3 Prevailing Noise Levels
4.2.3.1 Prevailing noise levels have been measured in the vicinity of the assessment area in February, March 2012 and Feb 2014. Figure 4.4 shows the locations of prevailing noise measurements. A summary of the results are given in the Table 4.11.
Table 4.11 Prevailing noise measurements
Monitoring Location [1] |
Prevailing Noise Levels[2], dB(A) |
||
Day[3] |
Evening[3] |
Night[3] |
|
Tung Chung Development
Ferry Pier (PNM-1) |
59 – 64 |
59 – 61 |
53 – 61 |
Reclamation
Area next to Tung Chung East (PNM-2) |
56 – 60 |
55 – 57 |
53 – 59 |
Caribbean
Coast – Facing Ying Hei Road (PNM-3) |
62 – 63 |
62 – 63 |
54 - 60 |
Coastal
Skyline – Facing Tung Chung Waterfront Road (PNM-4) |
56 - 62 |
54 – 58 |
51 - 54 |
Ngong Ping
Cable Car Terminal (PNM-5) |
67 – 70 |
65 – 68 |
66 – 67 |
Yat Tung
Estate – Facing Yu Tung Road (PNM-6) |
54 – 58 |
52 – 56 |
48 – 55 |
Mok Ka (PNM-7) |
48 – 56 |
45 – 50 |
45 - 50 |
Shek Mun Kap
(PNM-8) |
45 – 52 |
43 - 48 |
43 – 47 |
Ma Wan Chung
Pier (PNM-9) |
58 – 61 |
56 - 58 |
51 – 52 |
Hill Top –
East Side of Tung Chung Road North (PNM-10) |
55 – 57 |
54 - 55 |
51 – 52 |
Notes:
[1] PNM
represents prevailing noise measurement location.
[2] Measurements
conducted without facade correction in February, March 2012 and February 2014.
[3] Day:
0700 to 1900 hours, Evening: 1900 to 2300 hours, Night: 2300 – 0700 hours.
4.2.4
Noise Sensitive
Receivers
4.2.4.1
With reference to
Annex 13 of the TM-EIAO, NSRs include residential uses (all domestic premises
including temporary housing), institutional uses (educational institutions
including kindergarten and nurseries), hospitals, medical clinics, homes for
the aged, convalescent homes, places of worship, libraries, court of law,
performing arts centres, auditoria and amphitheatres, country park and others.
4.2.4.2
Representative
NSRs within the assessment area have been identified with the first layer of
NSRs selected for assessment. These NSRs cover all existing sensitive
developments, committed and planned NSRs during construction and operational
phases.
4.2.4.3
The existing NSRs
are identified by means of topographic maps, aerial photos, land status plans,
S.16 / S.12a Town Planning Ordinance and site inspections. Planned / committed
NSRs are identified by making reference to relevant Outline Zoning Plans (OZP),
Development Permission Area Plans, Outline Development Plans (ODP), Layout
Plans and other relevant published land use plans, including plans and drawings
published by the Lands Department and any land use and development applications
approved by Town Planning Board in the vicinity of the Project.
4.2.4.4
The existing,
committed and planned representative NSRs in the vicinity, which may be
affected are identified in the table below and illustrated in Figures 4.5 to 4.13. Appendix 4.1 shows the photos of existing NSRs Appendix 4.1a indicates the NSRs to be assessed in different
types of noise assessments and the associated Area Sensitivity Ratings of NSRs
under fixed noise, operational groundborne noise and rail airborne noise
assessments.
Table 4.12 Existing, committed and planned representative NSRs
No.[1] |
NSR |
Uses[2] |
No. of Storey |
N1 |
Residential Premises
in Tung Chung East (Planned NSR) |
R[3] |
7 – 58 [3] |
Schools in Tung Chung East (Planned NSR) |
E[3] |
8 – 11[3] |
|
N2 |
Residential
Premises in Tung Chung West (Planned NSR) |
R[3] |
3 – 38[3] |
Schools in Tung
Chung West (Planned NSR) |
E[3] |
8[3] |
|
N2-1[4] |
Ma Wan Chung |
V |
1 – 2 |
N2-2[4] |
Ngau Au and Tung
Hing |
V |
1 – 3 |
N2-3[4] |
V |
1 – 3 |
|
N2-4[4] |
Nim Yuen |
V |
1 – 3 |
N2-5[4] |
Mok Ka |
V |
1 – 3 |
N2-6[4] |
Shek Lau Po |
V |
1 – 3 |
N2-7[4] |
Shek Mun Kap |
V |
1 – 3 |
N2-8[4] |
Temple |
W |
1 |
N2-9[4] |
Prajna Dhyana Temple |
W |
1 – 2 |
N2-10[4] |
Hau Wong Temple |
W |
2 |
N2-11[4] |
Wong Nai Uk |
V |
1-3 |
N3[5] |
Reclamation Area next to TCE |
R |
26 – 42 |
|
|
E |
8 |
N4 |
Tung Chung Crescent |
R |
28 –
50 |
N9 |
Yat Tung Estate |
R |
40 |
N10 |
Sheung Ling Pei |
V |
1 – 3 |
N11 |
Ha Ling Pei |
V |
1 – 3 |
N12 |
Wong Ka Wai |
V |
1 – 3 |
N13 |
Lung Tseng Tau |
V |
1 – 3 |
N14 |
YMCA of Hong Kong
Christian College |
E |
8 |
N15 |
Caritas Charles Vath
College |
E |
8 |
N16[6] |
North Lantau Hospital |
Hos |
10 |
N17[7] |
Possible Public Housing
Development at Tung Chung Area 39 |
R |
31 –
40 |
Social
Welfare Facilities at Tung Chung Area 39 |
R |
4 |
|
Possible
School Development near Tung Chung Area
39 |
E, R |
2 – 4 |
|
N18 |
Temple and Houses in Shek
Pik Au |
W, V |
1 – 2 |
N19 |
Scattered Houses near Shek
Pik Au |
V |
1 |
N20 |
Scattered Houses near Tung
Chung Bay |
V |
1 – 2 |
N22 |
Chek Lap Kok New Village |
V |
1 - 3 |
N23 |
Tei Po New Village |
V |
1 - 3 |
N25 |
Shan Ha (Pa Mei) |
V |
1 - 3 |
N28 |
Ho Yu College and Ho Yu Primary
School |
E |
7 |
N29 |
Caribbean Coast |
R |
60 |
N31 |
Lantau North (Extension) Country Park |
O |
N/A[8] |
N32 |
Yu Tung Court |
R |
28-38 |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W – Places of Public
Worship, V– Village type development, Hos – Hospital, O – Others.
[3] Landuse
and no. of storey according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
In addition, C-01 and G0-2 will not rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[4] Existing
NSRs retained within TCW.
[5] According
to the latest information from the “Proposed Residential / Commercial
Development at TCTL 36, Tung Chung”, “Proposed Residential Development at Tung
Chung Area 55B, TCTL No. 37”, “Public Rental Housing Development at Area 56,
Tung Chung” and approved EIA Report
“Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway
System” (AEIAR-185/2014). Construction of the NAPs at these locations are
either completed, on-going, or expected to be completed by Year 2020.
[6] A site
visit has been conducted on February 2014 and found that the North Lantau
Hospital does not rely on opened window for ventilation. Thus, the noise
standard is not applicable for the North Lantau Hospital.
[7] The
development layout and no. of storey have been based on the “Planning Brief for
Public Rental Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39”.
[8] N/A
– Not applicable.
4.3
Construction Airborne Noise Impact Assessment
4.3.1
Construction Noise Impact Assessment
Methodology
4.3.1.1
Construction noise assessment will be
conducted based on the following procedures:
·
Determine 300m from the boundary of the
Project Site and associated works;
·
Identify and locate representative NSRs
that may be affected by the works;
·
Obtain the construction method and work
sequence for the construction period;
·
Obtain the construction plant inventory for
each corresponding construction work sequence;
·
Determine the SWLs of the plant items
according to the information stated in the TM-GW or other recognised sources of
reference, where appropriate;
·
Calculate the correction factors based on
the distance between the NSRs and the notional noise source positions of the
work sites;
·
Apply corrections for façade, distance,
barrier attenuation, acoustic reflection where applicable;
·
Predict construction noise levels at the
NSRs;
·
Quantify the level of impact at the NSRs,
in accordance with TM-GW;
·
Predict the cumulative noise impacts for
any concurrent construction works in the vicinity of the proposed work;
·
For any exceedance of noise criteria, all
practical mitigation measures such as alternative construction methodology,
quiet plant, silencer, enclosure, etc, shall be examined to alleviate the
predicted noise impacts as much as practicable; and
·
Consideration of noise mitigation measures
will follow Annex 13 of TM-EIAO and EIAO Guidance Note “Preparation of
Construction Noise Impact Assessment under the Environmental Impact Assessment
Ordinance” [GN 9/2010].
4.3.2
Identification of Construction Noise
Impact
Identification of Assessment Area and Noise
Sensitive Receivers
4.3.2.1
For construction noise assessment, the
assessment area include areas within 300m from the boundary of the Project and
the works of the Project. Representative NSRs locations that would be affected
by the construction activities have been selected from Table 4.12 and are
summarised in the table below and shown in Figure 4.5.
Table 4.13 Representative NSRs for construction airborne
noise assessment
No.[1] |
Uses[2] |
No. of Storey |
NAP[7] |
Planned NSRs – TCE |
|||
N1 |
R[3] |
7 – 58 [3] |
TCE Phase 1 (2020 Jan – 2023 Sep) B1-2-03, B1-2-04, B1-2-06 TCE Phase 2 (2020 Apr – 2030 Jan) D2-2-02 TCE Phase 3 (2022 Nov – 2027 Dec) A1-2-01, A2-2-05, A2-4-01 TCE Phase 4 (2024 Jan – 2030 Mar) C1-1-04, E1-4-03 |
E[3] |
8 – 11[3] |
TCE Phase 1 (2020 Jan – 2023 Sep) N/A TCE Phase 2 (2020 Apr – 2030 Jan) N/A TCE Phase 3 (2022 Nov – 2027 Dec) N/A TCE Phase 4 (2024 Jan – 2030 Mar) F0-3-01 |
|
Planned NSRs - TCW |
|||
N2 |
R[3] |
3 – 40[3] |
TCW Phase 1 (2019 Apr – 2030 Dec) TCV-6-01, TCV-7-01 TCW Phase 2 (2022 Apr – 2030 Dec) N/A[8] |
Existing / Committed NSRs |
|||
N2-1[4] |
V |
1 – 2 |
MWC-001, MWC-003, TCRN-001 |
N2-2[4] |
V |
1 – 3 |
NGA-001, NGA-002, NGA-003 |
N2-3[4] |
V |
1 – 3 |
LAC-001 |
N2-4[4] |
V |
1 – 3 |
NIY-001 |
N2-5[4] |
V |
1 – 3 |
MOK-002 |
N2-6[4] |
V |
1 – 3 |
SLP-001, SLP-004 |
N2-7[4] |
V |
1 – 3 |
SMK-002, SMK-003 |
N2-11[4] |
V |
1 – 3 |
TCRN-002 |
N3[5] |
R |
26 – 42 |
A55a-001, A56-001, A56-004 |
E |
8 |
PSc-001 |
|
N9 |
R |
40 |
YTE-001, YTE-005, YTE-006, YTE-007 |
N10 |
R |
1 – 3 |
FYH-001 |
N13 |
V |
1 – 3 |
LTT-001 |
N14 |
E |
8 |
ESc-006 |
N15 |
E |
8 |
ESc-003 |
N17[6] |
R |
2 |
A39-SW-001 |
E |
2 |
PSc-004 |
|
N18 |
V |
1 – 2 |
SPA-001 |
N19 |
V |
1 |
SPA-002 |
N20 |
V |
1 – 2 |
TCB-001 |
N22 |
V |
1 - 3 |
CLK-002 |
N31 |
O |
N/A[8] |
LNCP-001, LNCP-002, LNCP-003 |
N32 |
R |
28-38 |
YTC-001 |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, V– Village type development,
O – Others.
[3] Landuse
and no. of storey according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[4] Existing
NSRs retained within TCW.
[5] According
to the latest information from the “Proposed Residential / Commercial
Development at TCTL 36, Tung Chung”, “Proposed Residential Development at Tung
Chung Area 55B, TCTL No. 37” and “Public Rental Housing Development at Area 56,
Tung Chung”.
[6] The
development layout and no. of storey have been based on the “Planning Brief for
Public Rental Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39”.
[7] NAP
– Noise Assessment Point.
[8] N/A
– Not applicable.
Inventory of Noise Sources
4.3.2.2
Key construction activities have been identified for noise assessment.
The major construction works would include the following activities:
·
Reclamation for the TCE and for
Road P1 Extension;
·
Site clearance and formation activities
for TCE and TCW;
·
Construction of new rising main at TCE
connecting the proposed SPS within TCE to existing Siu Ho Wan Sewage Treatment
Works (SHWSTW);
·
Upgrading of the existing Chung Mun Road
sewage pumping station;
·
Construction of service reservoirs;
·
De-channelisation works along the
channelized section of Tung Chung Stream;
·
Construction of River Park in the land
adjacent to a section of Tung Chung Stream up to Shek Mun Kap;
·
Construction of internal roads; and
·
Construction of superstructure.
4.3.2.3
In addition, cumulative impacts from concurrent projects include
following construction activities:
·
Construction of marina;
·
Construction of sports ground;
·
Re-alignment of existing TCL;
·
Construction of Railway Stations at TCE /
TCW;
·
Construction of additional sewage rising
mains and rehabilitation of the existing sewage rising main between Tung Chung
and Siu Ho Wan; and
·
Planned developments in the existing Tung
Chung New Town such as residential developments at Tung Chung Area 27, Area 39,
Area 54, Area 55 and Area 56 and hotel development at Tung Chung Area 53a.
4.3.2.4
These construction activities would be carried out with the use of PME
including breakers, pipe pile rigs, excavators, lorries, mobile cranes,
concrete pumps, concrete mixers, pokers, rollers, etc. SWLs for each PME would
be established according to TM-GW and other relevant information as
appropriate.
Utilization Rates and SWLs of Powered Mechanical Equipment
4.3.2.5 Practically, the PMEs will not be operating for all times within a work site. The utilization rates would depend on the construction sequences, work fronts scale and construction nature. In this assessment, the utilization rates have been reviewed by engineer and have been concluded to be practical for the purpose of this EIA. Appendix 4.2 tabulates the adopted utilisation rates.
4.3.3 Prediction and Evaluation of Construction Noise Impact
Phases of Construction
4.3.3.1
As discussed in above
section, the construction activities involve reclamation for the TCE and for
Road P1 Extension, site clearance and formation, etc. The construction
programme with phases of construction has been given in Appendix 2.7 and Appendix 4.4.
Scenarios
4.3.3.2
An in-house program has been used for construction noise calculations.
Initially, program runs were conducted without any mitigation measures (i.e.
the “Unmitigated Scenario”). Where noise level exceedance was identified,
further runs would be made assuming different combinations of mitigation
measures to be incorporated (i.e. the “Mitigated Scenario”).
Prediction of Noise Impact
4.3.3.3
According to the latest
engineering design, construction would mainly comprise the activities as
described in Section 4.3.2. The
corresponding SWLs of these activities have been estimated according to the
PME’s SWLs and the assessment methodology in the TM-GW. Appendix 4.2 presents the SWLs for each PME. Appendix 4.3 gives the plant inventory adopted for each
workfront and Appendix 4.4 shows the locations of
workfronts adopted for this construction noise assessment.
4.3.3.4
The monthly unmitigated
noise contribution and impacts from different phases of construction during the
construction period have been conducted in accordance with the work programme
given in Appendix 4.5. Appendix 4.6 and Appendix 4.6a present the calculated construction noise impacts
at selected representative NSRs and at various representative floor levels
respectively. The predicted construction noise impacts at the NSRs under
unmitigated scenario are summarised in Table
4.14 below.
Table 4.14 Predicted construction noise impact at NSRs
under unmitigated scenario
No.[1] |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses[4] |
Leq (30mins), dB(A) |
Duration
of Exceedance Months |
||
Criterion[5] |
Unmitigated Noise Level[6] |
Exceedance[5] |
||||
N1 |
A1-2-01 |
R[3] |
75 |
79 |
4 |
5 months |
A2-2-05 |
R[3] |
75 |
82 |
7 |
17 months |
|
A2-4-01 |
R[3] |
75 |
82 |
7 |
23 months |
|
B1-2-03 |
R[3] |
75 |
87 |
12 |
15 months |
|
B1-2-04 |
R[3] |
75 |
85 |
10 |
62 months |
|
B1-2-06 |
R[3] |
75 |
84 |
9 |
51 months |
|
C1-1-04 |
R[3] |
75 |
67 |
- |
- |
|
D2-2-02 |
R[3] |
75 |
81 |
6 |
47 months |
|
E1-4-03 |
R[3] |
75 |
75 |
- |
- |
|
F0-3-01 |
E[3] |
70 (65) |
81 |
11 (16) |
2 months (1 month) |
|
N2 |
TCV-6-01 |
R[3] |
75 |
74 |
- |
- |
TCV-7-01 |
R[3] |
75 |
72 |
- |
- |
|
N2-1[7] |
MWC-001 |
V |
75 |
86 |
11 |
62 months |
MWC-003 |
V |
75 |
87 |
12 |
74 months |
|
TCRN-001 |
V |
75 |
71 |
- |
- |
|
N2-2[7] |
NGA-001 |
V |
75 |
77 |
2 |
43 months |
NGA-002 |
V |
75 |
78 |
3 |
43 months |
|
NGA-003 |
V |
75 |
79 |
4 |
105 months |
|
N2-3[7] |
LAC-001 |
V |
75 |
85 |
10 |
105 months |
N2-4[7] |
NIY-001 |
V |
75 |
80 |
5 |
43 months |
N2-5[7] |
MOK-002 |
V |
75 |
86 |
11 |
43 months |
N2-6[7] |
SLP-001 |
V |
75 |
77 |
2 |
62 months |
SLP-004 |
V |
75 |
78 |
3 |
105 months |
|
N2-7[7] |
SMK-002 |
V |
75 |
81 |
6 |
105 months |
SMK-003 |
V |
75 |
86 |
11 |
63 months |
|
N2-11 |
TCRN-002 |
V |
75 |
85 |
10 |
55 months |
N3[8] |
A55a-001 |
R |
75 |
79 |
4 |
54 months |
A56-001 |
R |
75 |
86 |
11 |
54 months |
|
A56-004 |
R |
75 |
87 |
12 |
54 months |
|
PSc-001 |
E |
70 (65) |
80 |
10 (15) |
72 months (24 months) |
|
N9 |
YTE-001 |
R |
75 |
82 |
7 |
74 months |
YTE-005 |
R |
75 |
83 |
8 |
105 months |
|
YTE-006 |
R |
75 |
83 |
8 |
105 months |
|
YTE-007 |
R |
75 |
77 |
2 |
57 months |
|
N10 |
FYH-001 |
V |
75 |
81 |
6 |
25 months |
N13 |
LTT-001 |
V |
75 |
79 |
4 |
55 months |
N14 |
ESc-006 |
E |
70 (65) |
80 |
10 (15) |
141 months (46 months) |
N15 |
ESc-003 |
E |
70 (65) |
79 |
9 (14) |
57 months (46 months) |
N17[9] |
A39-SW-001 |
R |
75 |
80 |
5 |
60 months |
PSc-004 |
E |
70 (65) |
79 |
9 (14) |
141 months (46 months) |
|
N18 |
SPA-001 |
V |
75 |
72 |
- |
- |
N19 |
SPA-002 |
V |
75 |
71 |
- |
- |
N20 |
TCB-001 |
V |
75 |
70 |
- |
- |
N22 |
CLK-002 |
V |
75 |
84 |
9 |
53 months |
N31 |
LNCP-001 |
O |
N/A[10] |
71 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
LNCP-002 |
O |
N/A[10] |
84 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-003 |
O |
N/A[10] |
74 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-004 |
O |
N/A[10] |
62 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-005 |
O |
N/A[10] |
62 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-006 |
O |
N/A[10] |
53 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-007 |
O |
N/A[10] |
63 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-008 |
O |
N/A[10] |
66 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-009 |
O |
N/A[10] |
69 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
N32 |
YTC-001 |
R |
75 |
77 |
2 |
57 months |
Notes:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened
windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP equals to Noise Assessment Points.
[3] The first layer of NSRs within 300m from Project boundary is
included.
[4] R– Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, V –
Village Development, O – Others.
[5] Values in parentheses indicate the noise criterion during
examination period (Jan, Feb, May and June) of educational institution.
[6] Bolded values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
[7] Existing NSRs retained within TCW.
[8] According to the latest information from the “Proposed
Residential / Commercial Development at TCTL 36, Tung Chung”, “Proposed
Residential Development at Tung Chung Area 55B, TCTL No. 37” and “Public Rental
Housing Development at Area 56, Tung Chung”.
[9] The development layout and no. of storey have been based on
the “Planning Brief for Public Rental Housing Development at Tung Chung Area
39”.
[10] N/A – Not applicable.
4.3.3.5
It can be seen from the above table that without any mitigation
measures, exceedances of noise criteria range from 2 to 12 dB(A) for
residential premises and from 9 to 16 dB(A) for educational institutions
between 2017 to 2030. Details of construction noise impacts for different
phasing are given in Appendix 4.5. Mitigation measures are therefore
required.
4.3.3.6
The total number of dwellings, classrooms and other noise sensitive
receivers that will be exposed to noise impact exceeding the criteria set in
Annex 5 in the TM have been calculated. It is predicted that a total of about 9,200
dwellings and 300 classrooms will be exposed to construction noise impact under
unmitigated scenario.
4.3.4 Mitigation of Construction Noise Impact
4.3.4.1
The predicted noise levels show that the unmitigated construction noise
impacts would exceed the daytime noise criteria. Mitigation measures are
therefore required. The following mitigation measures have been considered:
·
Good site practices to limit noise
emissions at the source;
·
Use of quality powered mechanical
equipment (QPME);
·
Use of temporary noise barriers and noise
enclosure to screen noise from relatively static PMEs;
·
Alternative use of plant items within one
worksite, wherever practicable.
4.3.4.2 The above mitigation measures would need to be implemented in work sites as good practices where appropriate. Detailed descriptions of these mitigation measures are given in the following sections.
(A) Good Site Management
Practices
4.3.4.3 Good site practice and noise management techniques could considerably reduce the noise impact from construction site activities on nearby NSRs. The following measures should be practised during each phase of construction:
·
only well-maintained plant should be
operated on-site and plant should be serviced regularly during the construction
programme;
·
machines and plant (such as trucks,
cranes) that may be in intermittent use should be shut down between work
periods or should be throttled down to a minimum;
·
plant known to emit noise strongly in one
direction, where possible, be orientated so that the noise is directed away
from nearby NSRs;
·
silencers or mufflers on construction
equipment should be properly fitted and maintained during the construction
works;
·
mobile plant should be sited as far away
from NSRs as possible and practicable; and
·
material stockpiles, site office and other
structures should be effectively utilised, where practicable, to screen noise
from on-site construction activities.
4.3.4.4 The benefits of these techniques can vary according to specific site conditions and operations. The environmental noise climate would certainly be improved with these control practices, although the improvement can only be quantified during implementation when specific site parameters are known.
(B) Use of Quality Powered
Mechanical Equipment (QPME)
4.3.4.5 The use of quiet plant associated with the construction works is made reference to the PME listed in the TM or the QPME/ other commonly used PME listed in EPD web pages as far as possible which includes the SWLs for specific quiet PME. It is generally known (supported by field measurement) that particular models of construction equipment are quieter than standard types given in the TM-GW. Whilst it is generally considered too restrictive to specify that the Contractor has to use specific models or items of plant, it is reasonable and practicable to set plant noise performance specifications for specific PME so that some flexibility in selection of plant is allowed. A pragmatic approach would be to request that the Contractor independently verifies the noise level of the plant proposed to be used and demonstrates through furnishing of these results, that the plant proposed to be used on the site meets the requirements.
4.3.4.6 CNP applications which contain sufficient details of any particularly quiet items of PME or any special noise control measures which the CNP applicant proposes to employ on the site may be given special consideration by the Noise Control Authority. It should be noted that EPD may apply the noise levels specified in the TM-GW and TM-DA when processing a CNP application for evening or night time works.
(C) Use of
Movable Noise Barrier and Full Enclosure for Relatively Fixed Plant Source
4.3.4.7 Movable temporary noise barriers that can be located close to noisy plant and be moved concurrently with the plant along a worksite can be very effective for screening noise from NSRs. A typical design which has been used locally is a wooden framed barrier with a small-cantilevered upper portion of superficial density no less than 7kg/m2 on a skid footing with 25mm thick internal sound absorptive lining. This measure is particularly effective for low level zone of NSRs. A cantilevered top cover would be required to achieve screening benefits at upper floors of NSRs.
4.3.4.8 Movable temporary noise barriers will be used for some PME (e.g. excavator). It is anticipated that suitably designed barriers could achieve at least 5dB(A) reduction for movable plant and 10dB(A) for stationary plant.
4.3.4.9 The use of standard enclosure has been considered in this assessment to shelter relatively fixed plant including air compressor, generator. These standard enclosures can provide at least 15dB(A) noise reduction.
4.3.4.10 To ensure the design and logistics of movable temporary noise barrier can be effectively manoeuvred with the PME, a noise mitigation plan shall be prepared to provide construction details, manoeuvring mechanism and trailing routes for the respective PME as part of the detailed implementation requirements.
4.3.4.11 The feasibility, practicability, programming and effectiveness of the above mitigation measures have been reviewed by engineer.
4.3.4.12 A summary of the movable temporary noise barrier and standard enclosure adopted for various PMEs is given in Appendix 4.2 and indicative drawing for barrier and standard enclosure is shown in Appendix 4.7, and the associated noise reduction is summarised in Table 4.15 below.
Table 4.15 Summary of barrier and standard enclosure adopted for PMEs
PME |
Enclosure / Barrier |
Attenuation, dB(A) |
Air
Compressor |
Enclosure |
-15 |
Asphalt
Paver |
Barrier |
-5 |
Bar
Bender and Cutter (Electric) |
Barrier |
-10 |
Hand
Held Breaker |
Barrier |
-10 |
Bulldozer |
Barrier |
-5 |
Concrete
Lorry Mixer |
Barrier |
-5 |
Concrete
pump |
Enclosure |
-15 |
Mobile
Crane |
Barrier |
-5 |
Compactor,
vibratory |
Barrier |
-5 |
Dump
Truck |
Barrier |
-5 |
Drill
Rig, rotary type (Diesel) |
Barrier |
-10 |
Excavator |
Barrier |
-5 |
Backhoe |
Barrier |
-5 |
Grout
Mixer |
Barrier |
-10 |
Grout
Pump |
Enclosure |
-15 |
Hoist,
passenger/material (Petrol) |
Barrier |
-5 |
Lorry |
Barrier |
-5 |
Piling,
large dia bored, reverse circulation drill |
Barrier |
-10 |
Vibratory
Poker |
Barrier |
-10 |
Vibrating
Hammer |
Barrier |
-10 |
Rock
Drill |
Barrier |
-10 |
Roller |
Barrier |
-5 |
Water
pump |
Barrier |
-10 |
(D) Alternative
use of plant items within one worksite
4.3.4.13 In practice, some plant items will operate sequentially within the same work site, and certain reduction of the predicted noise impacts could be achieved. However, any additional control on the sequencing of plant will impose a restrictive constraint to the Contractor on the operation and planning of plant items, and the implementation of the requirement would be difficult to be monitored. Hence, sequencing operation of PME has not been taken into consideration.
Assessment Results of Construction Noise under
Mitigated Scenario
4.3.4.14
With the adoption of the
above mitigation measures, the monthly mitigated noise contribution and impacts
from different phases of construction during the construction period have been
conducted in accordance with the work programme given in Appendix
4.8.
4.3.4.15 Appendix 4.9 and Appendix 4.9a present a summary of the calculated construction noise impacts at selected representative NSRs and at various representative floor levels for mitigated scenario respectively. Concurrent projects, including construction of TCE and TCW Railway Stations have been considered, and the predicted construction noise impacts at the NSRs are summarised in the Table 4.16.
Table
4.16 Predicted
construction noise impact at NSRs under mitigated scenario
No.[1] |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses[4] |
Leq (30mins), dB(A) |
Duration of
Exceedance Months |
||
Criterion[5] |
Mitigated Noise Level[6] |
Exceedance[5] |
||||
N1 |
A1-2-01 |
R[3] |
75 |
66 |
- |
- |
A2-2-05 |
R[3] |
75 |
69 |
- |
- |
|
A2-4-01 |
R[3] |
75 |
68 |
- |
- |
|
B1-2-03 |
R[3] |
75 |
74 |
- |
- |
|
B1-2-04 |
R[3] |
75 |
73 |
- |
- |
|
B1-2-06 |
R[3] |
75 |
72 |
- |
- |
|
C1-1-04 |
R[3] |
75 |
50 |
- |
- |
|
D2-2-02 |
R[3] |
75 |
69 |
- |
- |
|
E1-4-03 |
R[3] |
75 |
58 |
- |
- |
|
F0-3-01 |
E[3] |
70 (65) |
65 |
-
(-) |
-
(-) |
|
N2 |
TCV-6-01 |
R[3] |
75 |
60 |
- |
- |
TCV-7-01 |
R[3] |
75 |
59 |
- |
- |
|
N2-1[7] |
MWC-001 |
V |
75 |
73 |
- |
- |
MWC-003 |
V |
75 |
75 |
- |
- |
|
TCRN-001 |
V |
75 |
57 |
- |
- |
|
N2-2[7] |
NGA-001 |
V |
75 |
63 |
- |
- |
NGA-002 |
V |
75 |
64 |
- |
- |
|
NGA-003 |
V |
75 |
66 |
- |
- |
|
N2-3[7] |
LAC-001 |
V |
75 |
71 |
- |
- |
N2-4[7] |
NIY-001 |
V |
75 |
67 |
- |
- |
N2-5[7] |
MOK-002 |
V |
75 |
74 |
- |
- |
N2-6[7] |
SLP-001 |
V |
75 |
62 |
- |
- |
SLP-004 |
V |
75 |
64 |
- |
- |
|
N2-7[7] |
SMK-002 |
V |
75 |
67 |
- |
- |
SMK-003 |
V |
75 |
75 |
- |
- |
|
N2-11 |
TCRN-002 |
V |
75 |
74 |
- |
- |
N3[8] |
A55a-001 |
R |
75 |
69 |
- |
- |
A56-001 |
R |
75 |
74 |
- |
- |
|
A56-004 |
R |
75 |
75 |
- |
- |
|
PSc-001 |
E |
70 (65) |
65 |
-
(-) |
-
(-) |
|
N9 |
YTE-001 |
R |
75 |
70 |
- |
- |
YTE-005 |
R |
75 |
71 |
- |
- |
|
YTE-006 |
R |
75 |
71 |
- |
- |
|
YTE-007 |
R |
75 |
64 |
- |
- |
|
N10 |
FYH-001 |
V |
75 |
70 |
- |
- |
N13 |
LTT-001 |
V |
75 |
65 |
- |
- |
N14 |
ESc-006 |
E |
70 (65) |
65 |
-
(-) |
-
(-) |
N15 |
ESc-003 |
E |
70 (65) |
65 |
-
(-) |
-
(-) |
N17[9] |
A39-SW-001 |
R |
75 |
66 |
- |
- |
PSc-004 |
E |
70 (65) |
65 |
-
(-) |
-
(-) |
|
N18 |
SPA-001 |
V |
75 |
59 |
- |
- |
N19 |
SPA-002 |
V |
75 |
58 |
- |
- |
N20 |
TCB-001 |
V |
75 |
56 |
- |
- |
N22 |
CLK-002 |
V |
75 |
73 |
- |
- |
N31 |
LNCP-001 |
O |
N/A[10] |
66 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
LNCP-002 |
O |
N/A[10] |
73 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-003 |
O |
N/A[10] |
61 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-004 |
O |
N/A[10] |
62 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-005 |
O |
N/A[10] |
48 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-006 |
O |
N/A[10] |
40 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-007 |
O |
N/A[10] |
49 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-008 |
O |
N/A[10] |
63 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
LNCP-009 |
O |
N/A[10] |
57 |
N/A[10] |
N/A[10] |
|
N32 |
YTC-001 |
R |
75 |
64 |
- |
- |
Note:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs
which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise Assessment Points.
[3] The first layer of NSRs within 300m from
Project boundary is included.
[4] R– Residential Premises, E – Educational
Institutions, V – Village Development, O – Others.
[5] Values in parentheses indicate the noise
criterion during examination period (Jan, Feb, May and June) of educational
institution.
[6] Bolded values mean exceedance of the
relevant noise criteria.
[7] Existing NSRs retained within TCW.
[8] According to the latest information from
the “Proposed Residential / Commercial Development at TCTL 36, Tung Chung”,
“Proposed Residential Development at Tung Chung Area 55B, TCTL No. 37” and
“Public Rental Housing Development at Area 56, Tung Chung”.
[9] The development layout
and no. of storey have been based on the “Planning Brief for Public Rental
Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39”.
[10] N/A – Not applicable.
4.3.4.16
From Table 4.16, construction noise impact
arising from the Project at all the planned and
existing NSRs including residential premises and schools during normal and examination
periods can be properly mitigated
by implementing the proposed noise control measures between 2017 and 2030.
4.3.4.17 Given the transient nature of visitor
using hiking trails and mitigation measures are recommended to reduce the noise
emission, adverse noise impact is not anticipated.
4.3.4.18 Details of construction
noise impact at different phasing are given in Appendix 4.8. The number of dwellings, classrooms and other sensitive receivers
that will be exposed to noise impact exceeding the criteria set in Annex 5 in
the TM is nil.
4.3.5 Evaluation of Residual Construction Noise Impact
4.3.5.1
Construction noise impact arising from the Project at all the planned and existing NSRs including residential premises
and schools during normal and examination periods can be properly mitigated by implementing the proposed noise control
measures. The number of dwellings, classrooms and other sensitive receivers
that will be exposed to adverse residual construction noise impact exceeding
the criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM is nil.
4.4
Construction Groundborne Noise Impact Assessment
4.4.1
Construction Noise Impact Assessment
Methodology
4.4.1.1
Potential groundborne noise impacts on planned NSRs during the
construction phase will arise mainly from the operation of Tunnel Boring
Machine (TBM) for the construction of the rail tunnel extending from the
existing Tung Chung Line to the future Tung Chung West Station.
4.4.1.2
The method used to predict construction groundborne noise is based on
the U.S. Department of Transportation “High-Speed Ground Transportation Noise
and Vibration Impact Assessment”, 1998. Details of the methodology is given in Appendix 4.10. This method was also adopted in the following approved EIAs:
·
Shatin to
Central Link – Tai Wai to Hung Hom (AEIAR-167/2012);
·
Shatin
to Central Link Stabling Sidings at Hung Hom Freight Yard (AEIAR-164/2012);
·
Kowloon
Southern Link (AEIAR-083/2005);
·
Shatin
to Central Link – Hung Hom to Admiralty Section (AEIAR-166/2012);
·
Shatin
to Central Link – Mong Kok East to Hung Hom Section (AEIAR-165/2012); and
·
Kwun
Tong Line Extension (AEIAR-154/2010).
4.4.2
Identification of Construction Noise
Impact
Identification of
Assessment Area and Noise Sensitive Receivers
4.4.2.1
For construction groundborne noise
assessment, the assessment area include areas within 300m from the underground
alignment and planned NSRs at TCW. Representative NSRs locations that would be
affected by the construction activities have been selected from Table 4.12 and are
summarised in the table below and shown in Figure 4.6.
4.4.2.2
As discussed in Section 4.2.2, as the proposed Railway
Stations at TCE and TCW and its associated railway
system is a separate Designated Project under Item A.2 of Schedule 2 of
TM-EIAO, a separate study would be conducted by the rail operator to fulfil all
the statutory requirements and procedures under the EIAO. As the noise emission is generated
from other project and construction of the planned TCW station is outside scope
of this project, construction ground borne noise assessment will be conducted
for planned NSRs within TCW as shown in the below table.
Table
4.20 Representative
NSRs for construction groundborne noise assessment
No. |
Uses[1] |
No. of Storey |
NAP[2] |
N2 |
R |
18 |
TCW-2-01 |
R |
18 |
TCW-2-02 |
Notes:
[1] R – Residential Premises.
[2] NAP – Noise Assessment
Points.
Inventory of Noise Sources
4.4.2.3
Potential groundborne noise impacts on planned NSRs during the
construction phase will arise mainly from the operation of Tunnel Boring
Machine (TBM) for the construction of the rail tunnel extending from the
existing Tung Chung Line to the future Tung Chung West Station. Other
construction activities such as lorry movement, concreting, road paving etc.
are unlikely to generate significant groundborne noise. To assess the
groundborne noise generated from the TBM, the most relevant source levels for
TBM were derived by making reference to the vibration source data from other
similar tunneling project – ‘Kowloon Southern Link’ (AEIAR-098/2004) by Kowloon–Canton
Railway Corporation (KCRC).
4.4.2.4
The validity of the inventory has been confirmed with the railway
operator.
4.4.3 Prediction and Evaluation of Construction Noise Impact
Phases of Construction
4.4.3.1
TBM is considered appropriate for the construction of part of the tunnel
since the current alignment is proposed to pass underneath the existing Man Wan
Chung bay area and also underneath the hill crests to the northeast of Ma Wan
Chung which has a height up to +50mPD. A minimum of 1.0d, where d is the tunnel
diameter, clearance has been allowed from the seabed level or ground level to
the top of the tunnel during the design of the vertical alignment of the tunnel.
The depth of the track level ranges from roughly -5mPD at the existing Tung
Chung Station to -18.25mPD at the proposed TCW station.
Scenarios
4.4.3.2
Similar to construction
airborne noise assessment, mitigated scenario will be conducted if the noise
levels under unmitigated scenario exceed the respective criteria.
Prediction of Noise Impact
4.4.3.3 The predicted construction groundborne noise levels are given in Appendix 4.10a and are summarized in the table below.
Table 4.21 Predicted construction noise impact at NSRs under unmitigated scenario
No. |
NAP[1] |
Uses[2] |
Leq (30mins), dB(A) |
||
Noise Criteria for daytime (0700-1900)[3] |
Unmitigated Noise Level |
Exceedance[4] |
|||
N2 |
TCW-2-01 |
R |
65 |
40 |
- |
TCW-2-02 |
R |
65 |
38 |
- |
Note:
[1] NAP – Noise Assessment Points.
[2] R – Residential Premises.
[3] Noise Criteria for daytime during normal
working hours governed by TM-EIAO under EIAO.
[4] Bolded values mean exceedance of the
relevant noise criteria.
4.4.3.4 As shown in Table 4.21, construction ground-borne noise levels at planned NSR TCW-2 at TCW would comply with the day time (0700-1900) noise criteria of 65 dB(A). Adverse ground-borne construction noise impact due to the use of PME would not be envisaged. The number of dwellings, classrooms and other sensitive receivers that will be exposed to noise impact exceeding the criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM is nil.
4.4.4 Mitigation of Construction Noise Impact
4.4.4.1 As adverse groundborne construction noise impact is not anticipated, mitigation measures are not required. The number of dwellings, classrooms and other sensitive receivers that will be exposed to noise impact exceeding the criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM is nil.
4.4.5 Evaluation of Residual Construction Noise Impact
4.4.5.1 Construction groundborne noise impact arising from the construction of tunnel alignment between Tung Chung West Railway Station and Tung Chung Station will be within respective criteria. Adverse residual noise impacts are thus not anticipated. The number of dwellings, classrooms and other sensitive elements that will be exposed to adverse residual noise impact exceeding the criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM is nil.
4.5 Road Traffic Noise Impact Assessment
4.5.1 Road Traffic Noise Impact Assessment Methodology
4.5.1.1
Road traffic noise calculation is based on the method of UK Department
of Transport "Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN)". The
predicted noise levels at the sensitive receivers include 2.5dB(A) facade
reflection and correction factors of effects due to gradient, distance, view
angle, road surface and barriers.
4.5.1.2
The computer programme, RoadNoise 2000, has been used to model traffic
noise from road networks. It complies with the Calculation of Road Traffic
Noise (CRTN) developed by the UK Department of Transport. The road traffic
noise will be presented in terms of noise levels exceeded for 10% of the
one-hour period during peak traffic flow [ie L10(1hr) dB(A)].
4.5.1.3
Calculations of future road traffic noise are based on the peak hourly
flow for the maximum traffic projected within a 15 years period upon full
operation of the roadworks or full occupation of the NSRs. The traffic
projection has taken into account the induced traffic due to the operation of
other planned roads and committed projects as below (As discussed in Section
1):
·
Hong Kong –
Zhuhai – Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (AEIAR-145/2009);
·
Hong Kong –
Zhuhai – Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road (AEIAR-144/2009);
·
Tuen Mun –
Chek Lap Kok Link (AEIAR-146/2009);
·
Possible
Lantau Logistics Park;
·
Expansion
of HKIA into a Three-Runway System (AEIAR-185/2014);
·
Planned
developments in the existing Tung Chung New Town such as residential
developments at Tung Chung Area 27, Area 39, Area 54, Area 55 and Area 56 and
hotel development at Tung Chung Area 53a;
·
North
Commercial District of Hong Kong International Airport;
·
Topside
Development at HZMB HKBCF;
·
Cross
Boundary Hub in Siu Ho Wan; and
·
Proposed
Leisure and Entertainment Node at Sunny Bay.
4.5.1.4
As discussed in Section
2,
since the first population intake and ultimate occupation year of the Project
will be in Year 2023 and 2029 – 2030 respectively, and operation of the
proposed road network will commence in Year 2030, the assessment year for road
traffic noise is taken as Year 2045 (which is the maximum traffic projection
within 15 years after full operation for the proposed development). Figure
4.1
shows the 300 metres from the boundary of TCE, TCW and associated works which
would be modelled by RoadNoise. Computer
plots for the prevailing scenario and with project scenario are shown in Appendix
4.11.
In addition, following phasings have been
conducted:
·
Phase 1 – population intake at Year 2023;
·
Phase 2 – population intake at Year 2025;
·
Phase 3 – population intake at Year 2027;
and
·
Phase 4 – population intake at Year 2030
(Year 2045 for the maximum traffic projection within 15 year is chosen for road
traffic noise assessment).
4.5.1.5 For assessment of the noise impacts on the existing NSRs due to the Project, according to EPD's Guidance Note 12/2010, the traffic noise impacts should be considered significant if the traffic noise level at the NSRs with the project is greater than that without the project by 1.0 dB(A) or more.
4.5.1.6 Where the predicted noise impacts with the project exceed the noise criteria, mitigation measures shall be considered to reduce the noise from the improved road and project road to a level that:
·
Is not higher than the standard; and
· Has no significant contribution to the overall noise from other existing roads, if the cumulative noise level, i.e. noise from the project road together with other existing roads exceeds the standard (i.e. less than 1.0 dB(A)).
4.5.2 Identification of Road Traffic Noise Impact
Identification of Assessment Area and Noise
Sensitive Receivers
4.5.2.1 For operational road traffic noise assessment, the assessment area for the road traffic noise impact include areas within 300m from the boundary of the planned road works and the planned NSRs of the Project. Representative NSR locations have been selected from Table 4.12 and are summarized in the table below and illustrated in Figure 4.7.
Table 4.22 Representative NSRs for road traffic noise
assessment
No.[1] |
Uses[2] |
No. of Storey |
NAP[9] |
Planned
NSRs - TCE |
|||
N1 |
R[3] |
7 – 58[3] |
A1-1-01a to A1-1-18, A1-2-01 to A1-2-18, A2-1-01
to A2-1-28, A2-2-01 to A2-2-04,
A2-2-06 to A2-2-09, A2-3-01
to A2-3-08, A2-4-01 to A2-4-37, B1-1-01 to B1-1-14, B1-2-01 to B1-2-59, C0-2-01
to C0-2-02, C1-1-01 to C1-1-57, C2-1-01 to C2-1-13, C2-2-01 to C2-2-03,
C2-2-14 to C2-2-31, D1-1-01 to D1-1-21, D1-2-01, D2-1-01, D2-2-02, D2-3-01 to
D2-3-09, D2-4-01 to D2-4-26, E1-1-01 to E1-1-02, E1-4-01 to E1-4-10, E1-5-01
to E1-5-07, E3-1-01, E3-1-03 to E3-1-07, F1-1-01 to F1-1-02, F1-1-04, F1-2-01
to F1-2-04, F2-1-01 to F2-1-02, F2-2-01 to F2-2-02 |
E[3] |
8 –
11[3] |
D0-3-01 to D0-3-05, D0-4-01 to D0-4-05, E0-1-01 to
E0-1-05, E0-2-01 to E0-2-02, E0-3-01 to E0-3-04, F0-2-01 to F0-2-02, F0-3-01
to F0-3-05, F0-4-01, F0-4-03 |
|
Planned
NSRs – TCW |
|||
N2 |
R[3]
|
3 – 40[3] |
TCW-1-01 to TCW-1-03, TCW-2-01 to TCW-2-03,
TCW-3-01, TCV-1-01 to TCV-1-05,
TCV-1-07 to TCV-1-19,
TCV-2-01 to TCV-2-05, TCV-3-01 ,TCV-4-01 to TCV-4-02, TCV-5a-01 to TCV-5a-04,
TCV-5b-01, TCV-6-01 to TCV-6-09, TCV-7-01 to TCV-7-03, TCV-8-01 |
Existing
NSRs |
|||
N2-1[4] |
V |
1 – 2 |
MWC-001 to MWC-002 |
N2-2[4] |
V |
1 – 3
|
NGA-001 |
N2-3[4] |
V |
1 – 3
|
LAC-001 |
N2-4[4] |
V |
1 – 3
|
NIY-001 |
N2-5[4] |
V |
1 – 3
|
MOK-001 to MOK-002 |
N2-6[4] |
V |
1 – 3
|
SLP-001 to SLP-004 |
N2-7[4] |
V |
1 – 3
|
SMK-001 to SMK-002 |
N2-8[4] |
W |
1 |
ETe-005 to ETe-008 |
N2-9[4] |
W |
1 – 2
|
ETe-001 to ETe-004 |
N2-10[4] |
W |
2 |
ETe-009 to ETe-011 |
N4 |
R |
28 –
50 |
TCC-001 |
N9 |
R |
40 |
YTE-001 to YTE-004 |
N10 |
V |
1 – 3
|
SHP-001 |
N11 |
V |
1 – 3
|
HLP-001 |
N12 |
V |
1 – 3
|
WKW-001 to WKW-002 |
N13 |
V |
1 – 3
|
LTT-001 |
N14 |
E |
8 |
ESc-005 to ESc-008, ESc-010 |
N15 |
E |
8 |
ESc-003 to ESc-004, ESc-009 |
N18 |
W, V |
1 – 2 |
ETe-012; SPA-001 |
N19 |
V |
1 |
SPA-002 |
N20 |
V |
1 – 2 |
TCB-001 |
N28 |
E |
7 |
ESc-001 to ESc-002 |
N29 |
R |
60 |
CAC-001 to CAC-002 |
N31 |
O |
N/A[6] |
LNCP-001 to LNCP-006, LNCP-008 to LNCP-009 |
Committed
NSRs |
|||
N3[5] |
R |
26 – 42 |
A54-001 to A54-002, A55a-001 to A55a-005, A55b-001
to A55b-003, A56-001 to A56-003 |
E |
8 |
PSc-001 to PSc-002 |
|
N17[7][8] |
R |
3 –
40 |
A39-001 to A39-006, PSc-005 to PSc-006 |
R |
2 – 5 |
A39-SW-001 to A39-SW-004 |
|
E |
2 |
PSc-003 to PSc-004 |
Notes:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened
windows for ventilation.
[2] R – Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W –
Places of Public Worship, V– Village type development, O – Others.
[3] Landuse and no. of storey according to the Recommended
Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[4] Existing NSRs retained within TCW.
[5] According to the latest information from the “Proposed
Residential / Commercial Development at TCTL 36, Tung Chung”, “Proposed
Residential Development at Tung Chung Area 55B, TCTL No. 37” and “Public Rental
Housing Development at Area 56, Tung Chung”.
[6] N/A – Not applicable.
[7] The development layout and no. of storey have been based on
the “Planning Brief for Public Rental Housing Development at Tung Chung Area
39”.
[8] PSc-005 to PSc-006 represent the boarding blocks of the
planned school near Area 39.
[9] NAP – Noise Assessment Points.
4.5.2.2 The representative site layouts for road traffic noise assessment have been confirmed with Planning Department and Lands Department. Along southern side of TCE, commercial developments are strategically planned to protect planned NSRs at the back. A review would be conducted for the environmental noise performance of the concerned NSRs if there is a programme mismatch between occupation of commercial buildings and population intake of residential developments. Assumption of phasing of the relevant commercial lots and the residential uses intended to be protected are listed below.
Table 4.22a Schedule of commercial developments
Land Lot Nos. for Commercial Buildings as Noise Screens in TCE |
Phase Intended to be Protected |
Completion Year |
|
COM-1 |
1 and
2 |
2023 |
|
A1-1[1] |
1, 2 and 3 |
2027 |
|
A1-2[1] |
1, 2 and 3 |
2027 |
|
COM-2 |
4 |
2030 |
|
COM-3 |
4 |
2030 |
Notes:
[1] Commercial development within the CDA
site would be constructed concurrently.
Inventory of Noise Sources
4.5.2.3 Major road traffic noise sources include roads in the vicinity of the project boundary and the associated road networks such as North Lantau Highway, Yu Tung Road and Tung Chung Road. The new road P1 and planned internal roads at TCE and TCW are also included. Hence, road traffic noise impacts on both existing, planned and committed NSRs have been assessed accordingly. Computer plot of road alignment in road traffic noise assessment is given in Appendix 4.11.
4.5.2.4 Details of traffic forecast for with and without project scenarios are given in Appendix 4.12. The traffic flow prediction has been confirmed with Transport Department.
4.5.3 Prediction and Evaluation of Road Traffic Noise Impact
Scenarios
4.5.3.1 The road traffic noise assessment includes following scenarios:
·
Unmitigated scenario at assessment year
2023 for Phase 1 population intake (Appendix 4.13a);
·
Mitigated scenario at assessment year 2023
for Phase 1 population intake (Appendix 4.14a);
·
Unmitigated scenario at assessment year
2025 for Phase 2 population intake (Appendix 4.13b);
·
Mitigated scenario at assessment year 2025
for Phase 2 population intake (Appendix 4.14b);
·
Unmitigated scenario at assessment year
2027 for Phase 3 population intake (Appendix 4.13c);
·
Mitigated scenario at assessment year 2027
for Phase 3 population intake (Appendix 4.14c);
·
Unmitigated scenario at assessment year
2045 (Maximum traffic
projection within 15 year after Phase 4 population intake at year 2030) (Appendix 4.13d);
·
Mitigated scenario at assessment year 2045
(Maximum traffic
projection within 15 year after Phase 4 population intake at year 2030) (Appendix 4.14d);
and
·
Prevailing scenario for indirect mitigated
measures eligibility assessment at assessment year 2017 (Appendix 4.13).
Prediction of Noise Impact
4.5.3.2
The predicted road traffic noise levels at each representative NSRs under
unmitigated scenario in different phases are presented in Tables 4.23 and 4.24. Appendix
4.13 shows
the details of the noise impacts at different levels of the NSRs under
unmitigated scenario in different phases.
Table 4.23a Predicted road traffic noise impact at existing and
committed NSRs under unmitigated scenario (Year 2023)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Noise Impact, L10
1hr dB(A) [6] |
Project Road
Contribution, dB(A) |
Mitigation Measures Required
[Y/N] |
||
Project Road |
Other Road |
Overall |
|||||||
N2-1[7] |
Ma Wan Chung |
MWC-001 to MWC-002 |
V |
70 |
54 - 58 |
52 - 57 |
56 - 60 |
3.6 - 4.7 |
N |
N2-2[7] |
Ngau
Au and Tung Hing |
NGA-001 |
V |
70 |
45 - 46 |
33 - 35 |
46 - 47 |
11.6 - 13.0 |
N |
N2-3[7] |
Lam
Che |
LAC-001 |
V |
70 |
37 |
15 - 17 |
37 |
20.7 - 21.8 |
N |
N2-4[7] |
Nim
Yuen |
NIY-001 |
V |
70 |
37 |
6 |
37 |
31.5 |
N |
N2-5[7] |
Mok
Ka |
MOK-001 to MOK-002 |
V |
70 |
40 - 43 |
24 - 29 |
40 - 43 |
13.6 - 16.1 |
N |
N2-6[7] |
Shek
Lau Po |
SLP-001 to SLP-004 |
V |
70 |
29 - 64 |
0 - 50 |
29 - 64 |
10.4 - 45.5 |
N |
N2-7[7] |
Shek
Mun Kap |
SMK-001 to SMK-002 |
V |
70 |
53 - 56 |
39 - 51 |
53 - 58 |
6.2 - 15.1 |
N |
N2-8[7] |
Temple |
ETe-005 to ETe-008 |
W |
65 |
45 - 54 |
38 - 52 |
45 - 56 |
2.9 - 7.1 |
N |
N2-9[7] |
Prajna
Dhyana Temple |
ETe-001 to ETe-004 |
W |
65 |
47 - 55 |
43 - 61 |
53 - 61 |
0.4 - 10.6 |
N |
N2-10[7] |
Hau Wong Temple |
ETe-009 to ETe-011 |
W |
65 |
48 - 54 |
30 - 45 |
50 - 54 |
4.3 - 19.4 |
N |
N3[8] |
Reclamation
Area next to Tung Chung East |
A54-001 to A54-002 |
R |
70 |
6 - 67 |
58 - 68 |
64 - 69 |
0.0 - 5.8 |
N |
A55a-001 to A55a-005 |
R |
70 |
12 - 59 |
48 - 64 |
48 - 64 |
0.0 - 4.3 |
N |
||
A55b-001 to A55b-003 |
R |
70 |
28 - 56 |
59 - 65 |
59 - 65 |
0.0 - 1.4 |
N |
||
A56-001 to A56-003 |
R |
70 |
50 - 66 |
48 - 68 |
59 - 68 |
0.0 - 13.7 |
N |
||
PSc-001 to PSc-002 |
E |
65 |
42 - 57 |
63 - 65 |
64 - 65 |
0.0 - 1.1 |
N |
||
N4 |
Tung
Chung Crescent |
TCC-001 |
R |
70 |
43 - 48 |
66 - 72 |
66 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N9 |
Yat
Tung Estate |
YTE-001 to
YTE-004 |
R |
70 |
0 - 63 |
60 - 72 |
62 - 72 |
0.0 - 2.4 |
N |
N10 |
Sheung
Ling Pei |
SHP-001 |
V |
70 |
26 - 31 |
66 |
66 |
0.0 |
N |
N11 |
Ha Ling Pei |
HLP-001 |
V |
70 |
46 - 47 |
70 |
70 |
0.0 |
N |
N12 |
Wong Ka Wai |
WKW-001 to WKW-002 |
V |
70 |
29 - 53 |
67 - 71 |
67 - 71 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N13 |
Lung Tseng Tau |
LTT-001 |
V |
70 |
58 - 59 |
66 |
67 |
0.7 |
N |
N14 |
YMCA
of Hong Kong Christian College |
ESc-005 to ESc-008, Esc-010 |
E |
65 |
64 - 67 |
28 - 44 |
64 - 67 |
21.6 - 37.5 |
Y |
N15 |
Caritas
Charles Vath College |
ESc-003 to ESc-004, ESc-009 |
E |
65 |
63 - 64 |
36 - 53 |
63 - 65 |
11.3 - 28.2 |
N |
N17[9][10] |
Possible
Public Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39 |
A39-001 to A39-006 |
R |
70 |
50 - 68 |
23 - 67 |
61 - 68 |
0.1 - 43.3 |
N |
Social Welfare Facilities at Tung
Chung Area 39 |
A39-SW-001 to A39-SW-004 |
R |
70 |
20 - 55 |
63 - 71 |
63 - 71 |
0.0 - 0.5 |
N |
|
Possible School Development near Tung
Chung Area 39 (with boarding blocks) |
PSc-003 to PSc-004 |
E |
65 |
62 - 63 |
32 - 56 |
62 - 63 |
7.3 - 30.3 |
N |
|
PSc-005 to PSc-006 |
R |
70 |
56 - 67 |
33 - 47 |
57 - 67 |
9.9 - 33.7 |
N |
||
N18 |
Temple
and Houses in Shek Pik Au |
ETe-012 |
W |
65 |
26 |
41 |
41 |
0.1 |
N |
SPA-001 |
V |
70 |
36 - 37 |
39 |
41 |
1.8 - 2.1 |
N |
||
N19 |
Scattered
Houses near Shek Pik Au |
SPA-002 |
V |
70 |
28 - 29 |
30 |
32 - 33 |
1.9 - 2.7 |
N |
N20 |
Scattered
Houses near Tung Chung Bay |
TCB-001 |
V |
70 |
23 - 25 |
26 - 27 |
28 - 29 |
1.5 - 2.0 |
N |
N28 |
Ho Yu College and Ho Yu Primary
School |
ESc-001 to ESc-002 |
E |
65 |
6 - 20 |
45 - 59 |
45 - 59 |
0.0 |
N |
N29 |
Caribbean Coast |
CAC-001 to CAC-002 |
R |
70 |
26 - 32 |
63 - 69 |
63 - 69 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N31 |
Lantau North (Extension) Country Park |
LNCP-001 to LNCP-006, LNCP-008 to LNCP-009 |
O |
N/A |
0 - 46 |
39 - 74 |
41 - 74 |
0.0 - 8.5 |
N/A |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP
– Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W – Places of Public
Worship, V– Village type development, O – Others.
[5] Landuse
according to the Outline Zoning Plan.
[6] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
[7] Existing
NSRs retained within TCW.
[8] According
to the latest information from the “Proposed Residential / Commercial
Development at TCTL 36, Tung Chung”, “Proposed Residential Development at Tung
Chung Area 55B, TCTL No. 37” and “Public Rental Housing Development at Area 56,
Tung Chung”.
[9] The
development layout and no. of storey have been based on the “Planning Brief for
Public Rental Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39”.
[10] PSc-005
to PSc-006 represent the boarding blocks of the planned school near Area 39.
[11] N/A
– Not applicable.
Table 4.23b Predicted road traffic noise impact at existing and
committed NSRs under unmitigated scenario (Year 2025)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Noise Impact, L10
1hr dB(A) [6] |
Project Road
Contribution, dB(A) |
Mitigation Measures Required
[Y/N] |
||
Project Road |
Other Road |
Overall |
|||||||
N2-1[7] |
Ma Wan Chung |
MWC-001 to MWC-002 |
V |
70 |
54 - 58 |
54 - 58 |
57 - 61 |
2.9 - 3.7 |
N |
N2-2[7] |
Ngau
Au and Tung Hing |
NGA-001 |
V |
70 |
45 - 46 |
33 - 35 |
46 |
11.4 - 12.9 |
N |
N2-3[7] |
Lam
Che |
LAC-001 |
V |
70 |
37 |
15 - 17 |
37 |
20.5 - 21.6 |
N |
N2-4[7] |
Nim
Yuen |
NIY-001 |
V |
70 |
37 |
6 |
37 |
30.8 - 30.9 |
N |
N2-5[7] |
Mok
Ka |
MOK-001 to MOK-002 |
V |
70 |
40 - 43 |
24 - 34 |
40 - 44 |
9.6 - 16.0 |
N |
N2-6[7] |
Shek
Lau Po |
SLP-001 to SLP-004 |
V |
70 |
29 - 64 |
0 - 50 |
29 - 64 |
10.2 - 45.2 |
N |
N2-7[7] |
Shek
Mun Kap |
SMK-001 to SMK-002 |
V |
70 |
55 - 58 |
47 - 51 |
55 - 58 |
6.9 - 9.1 |
N |
N2-8[7] |
Temple |
ETe-005 to ETe-008 |
W |
65 |
46 - 55 |
40 - 52 |
47 - 57 |
3.1 - 7.0 |
N |
N2-9[7] |
Prajna
Dhyana Temple |
ETe-001 to ETe-004 |
W |
65 |
47 - 56 |
43 - 61 |
53 - 61 |
0.4 - 10.6 |
N |
N2-10[7] |
Hau Wong Temple |
ETe-009 to ETe-011 |
W |
65 |
48 - 54 |
31 - 46 |
50 - 54 |
4.1 - 19.4 |
N |
N3[8] |
Reclamation
Area next to Tung Chung East |
A54-001 to A54-002 |
R |
70 |
6 - 68 |
59 - 69 |
65 - 69 |
0.0 - 6.1 |
N |
A55a-001 to A55a-005 |
R |
70 |
12 - 53 |
47 - 64 |
47 - 64 |
0.0 - 2.1 |
N |
||
A55b-001 to A55b-003 |
R |
70 |
30 - 53 |
56 - 64 |
58 - 64 |
0.0 - 1.6 |
N |
||
A56-001 to A56-003 |
R |
70 |
51 - 67 |
46 - 68 |
59 - 68 |
0.0 - 17.5 |
N |
||
PSc-001 to PSc-002 |
E |
65 |
44 - 55 |
59 - 63 |
61 - 63 |
0.0 - 1.2 |
N |
||
N4 |
Tung
Chung Crescent |
TCC-001 |
R |
70 |
43 - 48 |
66 - 72 |
66 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N9 |
Yat
Tung Estate |
YTE-001 to
YTE-004 |
R |
70 |
0 - 63 |
61 - 72 |
63 - 72 |
0.0 - 1.6 |
N |
N10 |
Sheung
Ling Pei |
SHP-001 |
V |
70 |
26 - 31 |
66 |
66 |
0.0 |
N |
N11 |
Ha Ling Pei |
HLP-001 |
V |
70 |
47 |
70 |
70 - 71 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N12 |
Wong Ka Wai |
WKW-001 to WKW-002 |
V |
70 |
29 - 53 |
68 - 72 |
68 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N13 |
Lung Tseng Tau |
LTT-001 |
V |
70 |
59 |
66 |
67 |
0.7 |
N |
N14 |
YMCA
of Hong Kong Christian College |
ESc-005 to ESc-008, Esc-010 |
E |
65 |
64 - 67 |
28 - 44 |
64 - 67 |
21.4 - 37.5 |
Y |
N15 |
Caritas
Charles Vath College |
ESc-003 to ESc-004, ESc-009 |
E |
65 |
63 - 65 |
36 - 53 |
63 - 65 |
11.1 - 28.2 |
N |
N17[9][10] |
Possible
Public Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39 |
A39-001 to A39-006 |
R |
70 |
50 - 68 |
24 - 68 |
61 - 68 |
0.1 - 42.8 |
N |
Social Welfare Facilities at Tung
Chung Area 39 |
A39-SW-001 to A39-SW-004 |
R |
70 |
20 - 55 |
64 - 72 |
64 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.5 |
N |
|
Possible School Development near Tung
Chung Area 39 (with boarding blocks) |
PSc-003 to PSc-004 |
E |
65 |
62 |
32 - 56 |
62 - 63 |
7.1 - 30.1 |
N |
|
PSc-005 to PSc-006 |
R |
70 |
56 - 67 |
33 - 48 |
57 - 67 |
9.3 - 33.5 |
N |
||
N18 |
Temple
and Houses in Shek Pik Au |
ETe-012 |
W |
65 |
28 |
43 |
43 - 44 |
0.1 |
N |
SPA-001 |
V |
70 |
37 - 38 |
47 |
48 |
0.4 - 0.5 |
N |
||
N19 |
Scattered
Houses near Shek Pik Au |
SPA-002 |
V |
70 |
28 - 30 |
38 |
39 |
0.3 - 0.5 |
N |
N20 |
Scattered
Houses near Tung Chung Bay |
TCB-001 |
V |
70 |
23 - 25 |
27 - 28 |
28 - 30 |
1.5 - 1.9 |
N |
N28 |
Ho Yu College and Ho Yu Primary
School |
ESc-001 to ESc-002 |
E |
65 |
10 - 21 |
43 - 59 |
43 - 59 |
0.0 |
N |
N29 |
Caribbean Coast |
CAC-001 to CAC-002 |
R |
70 |
27 - 32 |
62 - 69 |
62 - 69 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N31 |
Lantau North (Extension) Country Park |
LNCP-001 to LNCP-006, LNCP-008 to LNCP-009 |
O |
N/A |
0 - 57 |
39 - 74 |
41 - 74 |
0.0 - 8.4 |
N/A |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP
– Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W – Places of Public
Worship, V– Village type development, O – Others.
[5] Landuse
according to the Outline Zoning Plan.
[6] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
[7] Existing
NSRs retained within TCW.
[8] According
to the latest information from the “Proposed Residential / Commercial
Development at TCTL 36, Tung Chung”, “Proposed Residential Development at Tung
Chung Area 55B, TCTL No. 37” and “Public Rental Housing Development at Area 56,
Tung Chung”.
[9] The
development layout and no. of storey have been based on the “Planning Brief for
Public Rental Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39”.
[10] PSc-005
to PSc-006 represent the boarding blocks of the planned school near Area 39.
[11] N/A
– Not applicable.
Table 4.23c Predicted road traffic noise impact at existing and
committed NSRs under unmitigated scenario (Year 2027)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Noise Impact, L10
1hr dB(A) [6] |
Project Road
Contribution, dB(A) |
Mitigation Measures Required
[Y/N] |
||
Project Road |
Other Road |
Overall |
|||||||
N2-1[7] |
Ma Wan Chung |
MWC-001 to MWC-002 |
V |
70 |
54 - 58 |
54 - 58 |
57 - 61 |
2.9 - 3.8 |
N |
N2-2[7] |
Ngau
Au and Tung Hing |
NGA-001 |
V |
70 |
44 - 45 |
31 - 34 |
44 - 45 |
11.5 - 12.9 |
N |
N2-3[7] |
Lam
Che |
LAC-001 |
V |
70 |
37 |
16 - 17 |
37 |
20.1 - 21.3 |
N |
N2-4[7] |
Nim
Yuen |
NIY-001 |
V |
70 |
36 |
7 |
36 |
28.9 - 29.0 |
N |
N2-5[7] |
Mok
Ka |
MOK-001 to MOK-002 |
V |
70 |
39 - 42 |
24 - 34 |
39 - 43 |
8.7 - 15.4 |
N |
N2-6[7] |
Shek
Lau Po |
SLP-001 to SLP-004 |
V |
70 |
29 - 62 |
0 - 50 |
29 - 62 |
9.8 - 43.4 |
N |
N2-7[7] |
Shek
Mun Kap |
SMK-001 to SMK-002 |
V |
70 |
55 - 57 |
47 - 52 |
55 - 58 |
6.4 - 9.1 |
N |
N2-8[7] |
Temple |
ETe-005 to ETe-008 |
W |
65 |
46 - 54 |
40 - 53 |
47 - 57 |
2.7 - 6.8 |
N |
N2-9[7] |
Prajna
Dhyana Temple |
ETe-001 to ETe-004 |
W |
65 |
46 - 55 |
43 - 61 |
53 - 61 |
0.3 - 9.8 |
N |
N2-10[7] |
Hau Wong Temple |
ETe-009 to ETe-011 |
W |
65 |
47 - 53 |
29 - 45 |
50 - 54 |
4.2 - 20.5 |
N |
N3[8] |
Reclamation
Area next to Tung Chung East |
A54-001 to A54-002 |
R |
70 |
6 - 64 |
56 - 67 |
61 - 67 |
0.0 - 5.2 |
N |
A55a-001 to A55a-005 |
R |
70 |
16 - 52 |
49 - 64 |
49 - 64 |
0.0 - 1.6 |
N |
||
A55b-001 to A55b-003 |
R |
70 |
33 - 55 |
60 - 68 |
60 - 68 |
0.0 - 0.6 |
N |
||
A56-001 to A56-003 |
R |
70 |
55 - 69 |
51 - 69 |
63 - 69 |
0.2 - 13.8 |
N |
||
PSc-001 to PSc-002 |
E |
65 |
48 - 58 |
66 |
66 - 67 |
0.0 - 0.7 |
N |
||
N4 |
Tung
Chung Crescent |
TCC-001 |
R |
70 |
43 - 48 |
66 - 72 |
66 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N9 |
Yat
Tung Estate |
YTE-001 to
YTE-004 |
R |
70 |
0 - 63 |
62 - 72 |
63 - 72 |
0.0 - 1.6 |
N |
N10 |
Sheung
Ling Pei |
SHP-001 |
V |
70 |
25 - 31 |
66 |
66 |
0.0 |
N |
N11 |
Ha Ling Pei |
HLP-001 |
V |
70 |
46 - 47 |
71 |
71 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N12 |
Wong Ka Wai |
WKW-001 to WKW-002 |
V |
70 |
28 - 51 |
68 - 72 |
68 - 72 |
0.0 |
N |
N13 |
Lung Tseng Tau |
LTT-001 |
V |
70 |
57 |
67 |
67 |
0.4 |
N |
N14 |
YMCA
of Hong Kong Christian College |
ESc-005 to ESc-008, ESc-010 |
E |
65 |
63 - 65 |
27 - 43 |
63 - 66 |
20.4 - 37.1 |
Y |
N15 |
Caritas
Charles Vath College |
ESc-003 to ESc-004, ESc-009 |
E |
65 |
61 - 63 |
37 - 53 |
62 - 63 |
9.1 - 26.1 |
N |
N17[9][10] |
Possible
Public Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39 |
A39-001 to A39-006 |
R |
70 |
48 - 67 |
24 - 68 |
60 - 68 |
0.0 - 41.2 |
N |
Social Welfare Facilities at Tung
Chung Area 39 |
A39-SW-001 to A39-SW-004 |
R |
70 |
20 - 55 |
63 - 73 |
64 - 73 |
0.0 - 0.6 |
N |
|
Possible School Development near Tung
Chung Area 39 (with boarding blocks) |
PSc-003 to PSc-004 |
E |
65 |
61 |
31 - 54 |
61 - 62 |
7.3 - 30.3 |
N |
|
PSc-005 to PSc-006 |
R |
70 |
55 - 65 |
32 - 48 |
56 - 65 |
7.7 - 33.7 |
N |
||
N18 |
Temple
and Houses in Shek Pik Au |
ETe-012 |
W |
65 |
28 |
43 - 44 |
43 - 44 |
0.1 |
N |
SPA-001 |
V |
70 |
36 - 37 |
47 |
48 |
0.4 |
N |
||
N19 |
Scattered
Houses near Shek Pik Au |
SPA-002 |
V |
70 |
27 - 29 |
38 |
39 |
0.3 - 0.5 |
N |
N20 |
Scattered
Houses near Tung Chung Bay |
TCB-001 |
V |
70 |
21 - 23 |
25 - 26 |
27 - 28 |
1.3 - 1.8 |
N |
N28 |
Ho Yu College and Ho Yu Primary
School |
ESc-001 to ESc-002 |
E |
65 |
13 - 21 |
46 - 59 |
46 - 59 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N29 |
Caribbean Coast |
CAC-001 to CAC-002 |
R |
70 |
27 - 32 |
64 - 70 |
64 - 70 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N31 |
Lantau North (Extension) Country Park |
LNCP-001 to LNCP-006, LNCP-008 to LNCP-009 |
O |
N/A |
0 - 59 |
37 - 75 |
41 - 75 |
0.0 - 8.4 |
N/A |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP
– Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W – Places of Public
Worship, V– Village type development, O – Others.
[5] Landuse
according to the Outline Zoning Plan.
[6] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
[7] Existing
NSRs retained within TCW.
[8] According
to the latest information from the “Proposed Residential / Commercial
Development at TCTL 36, Tung Chung”, “Proposed Residential Development at Tung
Chung Area 55B, TCTL No. 37” and “Public Rental Housing Development at Area 56,
Tung Chung”.
[9] The
development layout and no. of storey have been based on the “Planning Brief for
Public Rental Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39”.
[10] PSc-005
to PSc-006 represent the boarding blocks of the planned school near Area 39.
[11] N/A
– Not applicable.
Table 4.23d Predicted road traffic noise impact at existing
and committed NSRs under unmitigated scenario (Year 2045)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Noise Impact, L10
1hr dB(A) [6] |
Project Road
Contribution, dB(A) |
Mitigation Measures
Required [Y/N] |
||
Project Road |
Other Road |
Overall |
|||||||
N2-1[7] |
Ma Wan Chung |
MWC-001 to MWC-002 |
V |
70 |
55 - 58 |
54 - 58 |
57 - 61 |
3.0 - 3.8 |
N |
N2-2[7] |
Ngau
Au and Tung Hing |
NGA-001 |
V |
70 |
54 |
38 - 41 |
54 - 55 |
13.8 - 15.9 |
N |
N2-3[7] |
Lam
Che |
LAC-001 |
V |
70 |
61 |
16 - 17 |
61 |
43.9 - 45.4 |
N |
N2-4[7] |
Nim
Yuen |
NIY-001 |
V |
70 |
54 |
6 |
54 |
47.9 |
N |
N2-5[7] |
Mok
Ka |
MOK-001 to MOK-002 |
V |
70 |
52 - 53 |
25 - 45 |
52 - 53 |
7.9 - 27.2 |
N |
N2-6[7] |
Shek
Lau Po |
SLP-001 to SLP-004 |
V |
70 |
54 - 67 |
0 - 52 |
54 - 67 |
14.3 - 53.7 |
N |
N2-7[7] |
Shek
Mun Kap |
SMK-001 to SMK-002 |
V |
70 |
65 |
52 - 59 |
65 - 66 |
6.7 - 12.9 |
N |
N2-8[7] |
Temple |
ETe-005 to ETe-008 |
W |
65 |
51 - 62 |
49 - 55 |
55 - 62 |
2.5 - 10.0 |
N |
N2-9[7] |
Prajna
Dhyana Temple |
ETe-001 to ETe-004 |
W |
65 |
42 - 53 |
45 - 62 |
53 - 63 |
0.1 - 8.8 |
N |
N2-10[7] |
Hau Wong Temple |
ETe-009 to ETe-011 |
W |
65 |
52 - 60 |
36 - 49 |
54 - 60 |
4.7 - 21.2 |
N |
N3[8] |
Reclamation
Area next to Tung Chung East |
A54-001 to A54-002 |
R |
70 |
6 - 66 |
58 - 69 |
63 - 69 |
0.0 - 4.9 |
N |
A55a-001 to A55a-005 |
R |
70 |
16 - 51 |
50 - 65 |
50 - 65 |
0.0 - 1.4 |
N |
||
A55b-001 to A55b-003 |
R |
70 |
34 - 53 |
60 - 67 |
60 - 67 |
0.0 - 0.7 |
N |
||
A56-001 to A56-003 |
R |
70 |
59 - 67 |
49 - 70 |
60 - 71 |
0.3 - 14.5 |
N |
||
PSc-001 to PSc-002 |
E |
65 |
52 - 56 |
63 - 66 |
64 - 66 |
0.1 - 0.7 |
N |
||
N4 |
Tung
Chung Crescent |
TCC-001 |
R |
70 |
43 - 49 |
66 - 72 |
66 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N9 |
Yat
Tung Estate |
YTE-001 to
YTE-004 |
R |
70 |
0 - 64 |
62 - 72 |
63 - 72 |
0.0 - 1.6 |
N |
N10 |
Sheung
Ling Pei |
SHP-001 |
V |
70 |
42 |
69 |
69 |
0.0 |
N |
N11 |
Ha Ling Pei |
HLP-001 |
V |
70 |
52 |
72 |
72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N12 |
Wong Ka Wai |
WKW-001 to WKW-002 |
V |
70 |
42 - 55 |
68 - 72 |
68 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N13 |
Lung Tseng Tau |
LTT-001 |
V |
70 |
60 |
67 |
68 |
0.8 |
N |
N14 |
YMCA
of Hong Kong Christian College |
ESc-005 to ESc-008, Esc-010 |
E |
65 |
67 - 71 |
35 - 49 |
67 - 71 |
20.7 - 34.6 |
Y |
N15 |
Caritas
Charles Vath College |
ESc-003 to ESc-004, ESc-009 |
E |
65 |
65 - 67 |
38 - 54 |
65 - 67 |
11.1 - 28.4 |
Y |
N17[9][10] |
Possible
Public Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39 |
A39-001 to A39-006 |
R |
70 |
51 - 72 |
24 - 68 |
63 - 72 |
0.1 - 46.3 |
Y |
Social Welfare Facilities at Tung
Chung Area 39 |
A39-SW-001 to A39-SW-004 |
R |
70 |
32 - 59 |
64 - 72 |
64 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.4 |
N |
|
Possible School Development near Tung
Chung Area 39 (with boarding blocks) |
PSc-003 to PSc-004 |
E |
65 |
66 - 67 |
37 - 61 |
67 - 68 |
6.5 - 29.6 |
Y |
|
PSc-005 to PSc-006 |
R |
70 |
60 - 71 |
38 - 48 |
60 - 71 |
12.8 - 32.8 |
Y |
||
N18 |
Temple
and Houses in Shek Pik Au |
ETe-012 |
W |
65 |
38 |
53 - 54 |
53 - 54 |
0.1 |
N |
SPA-001 |
V |
70 |
42 |
60 |
60 |
0.1 |
N |
||
N19 |
Scattered
Houses near Shek Pik Au |
SPA-002 |
V |
70 |
33 - 34 |
51 |
51 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N20 |
Scattered
Houses near Tung Chung Bay |
TCB-001 |
V |
70 |
28 - 30 |
31 - 32 |
33 - 34 |
1.7 - 2.2 |
N |
N28 |
Ho Yu College and Ho Yu Primary
School |
ESc-001 to ESc-002 |
E |
65 |
12 - 21 |
48 - 61 |
48 - 61 |
0.0 |
N |
N29 |
Caribbean Coast |
CAC-001 to CAC-002 |
R |
70 |
27 - 32 |
65 - 72 |
65 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N31 |
Lantau North (Extension) Country Park |
LNCP-001 to LNCP-006, LNCP-008 to LNCP-009 |
O |
N/A |
0 - 62 |
42 - 77 |
42 - 77 |
0.0 - 8.1 |
N/A |
Notes:
[1] The assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows
for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise assessment point.
[3] The first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R – Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W –
Places of Public Worship, V– Village type development, O – Others.
[5] Landuse according to the Outline Zoning
Plan.
[6] Bolded values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
[7] Existing NSRs retained within TCW.
[8] According to the latest information from the “Proposed
Residential / Commercial Development at TCTL 36, Tung Chung”, “Proposed
Residential Development at Tung Chung Area 55B, TCTL No. 37” and “Public Rental
Housing Development at Area 56, Tung Chung”.
[9] The development layout and no. of storey have been based on
the “Planning Brief for Public Rental Housing Development at Tung Chung Area
39”.
[10] PSc-005 to PSc-006 represent the boarding blocks of the planned
school near Area 39.
[11] N/A – Not applicable.
Table 4.24a Predicted road traffic noise impact at
planned NSRs under unmitigated scenario (Year 2023)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Predicted Overall L10 1hr,
dB(A) [6] |
Mitigation Measures Required [Y/N] |
N1 |
B1-1 |
B1-1-01
to B1-1-14 |
R |
70 |
53 - 67 |
N |
B1-2 |
B1-2-01
to B1-2-59 |
R |
70 |
38 - 68 |
N |
|
N2 |
TCW-2 |
TCW-2-01
to TCW-2-03 |
R |
70 |
55 - 67 |
N |
TCW-3 |
TCW-3-01 |
R |
70 |
62 - 64 |
N |
|
TCV-6 |
TCV-6-01
to TCV-6-09 |
R |
70 |
60 - 70 |
N |
|
TCV-7 |
TCV-7-01
to TCV-7-03 |
R |
70 |
61 - 69 |
N |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP
– Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R –
Residential Premises.
[5] Landuse
according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[6] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
Table 4.24b Predicted road traffic noise impact at
planned NSRs under unmitigated scenario (Year 2025)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Predicted Overall L10 1hr,
dB(A) [6] |
Mitigation Measures Required [Y/N] |
N1 |
B1-1 |
B1-1-01
to B1-1-14 |
R |
70 |
51 - 70 |
N |
B1-2 |
B1-2-01
to B1-2-59 |
R |
70 |
56 - 72 |
Y |
|
D0-3 |
D0-3-01
to D0-3-05 |
E |
65 |
60 - 67 |
Y |
|
D0-4 |
D0-4-01
to D0-4-05 |
E |
65 |
60 - 68 |
Y |
|
D1-1 |
D1-1-01
to D1-1-05, D1-1-08 to D1-1-15 |
R |
70 |
65 - 73 |
Y |
|
D1-2 |
D1-2-01,
D1-1-06 to D1-1-07, D1-1-16 to D1-1-21 |
R |
70 |
64 - 71 |
Y |
|
D2-1 |
D2-1-01 |
R |
70 |
66 - 70 |
N |
|
D2-2 |
D2-2-02 |
R |
70 |
58 - 61 |
N |
|
D2-3 |
D2-3-01
to D2-3-09 |
R |
70 |
62 - 71 |
Y |
|
D2-4 |
D2-4-01
to D2-4-26 |
R |
70 |
60 - 73 |
Y |
|
N2 |
TCW-2 |
TCW-2-01
to TCW-2-03 |
R |
70 |
55 - 67 |
N |
TCW-3 |
TCW-3-01 |
R |
70 |
63 - 64 |
N |
|
TCV-6 |
TCV-6-01
to TCV-6-09 |
R |
70 |
60 - 70 |
N |
|
TCV-7 |
TCV-7-01
to TCV-7-03 |
R |
70 |
62 - 69 |
N |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP
– Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions.
[5] Landuse
according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[6] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
Table 4.24c Predicted road traffic noise impact at
planned NSRs under unmitigated scenario (Year 2027)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Predicted Overall L10 1hr,
dB(A) [6] |
Mitigation Measures Required [Y/N] |
N1 |
A1-1 |
A1-1-01a
to A1-1-18 |
R |
70 |
41 - 74 |
Y |
A1-2 |
A1-2-01
to A1-2-18 |
R |
70 |
36 - 71 |
Y |
|
A2-1 |
A2-1-01
to A2-1-28 |
R |
70 |
36 - 71 |
Y |
|
A2-2 |
A2-2-01
to A2-2-04, A2-2-06 to A2-2-09 |
R |
70 |
35 - 55 |
N |
|
A2-3 |
A2-3-01
to A2-3-08 |
R |
70 |
35 - 50 |
N |
|
A2-4 |
A2-4-01
to A2-4-37 |
R |
70 |
27 - 58 |
N |
|
B1-1 |
B1-1-01
to B1-1-14 |
R |
70 |
56 - 72 |
Y |
|
B1-2 |
B1-2-01
to B1-2-59 |
R |
70 |
55 - 73 |
Y |
|
D0-3 |
D0-3-01
to D0-3-05 |
E |
65 |
55 - 62 |
N |
|
D0-4 |
D0-4-01
to D0-4-05 |
E |
65 |
55 - 63 |
N |
|
D1-1 |
D1-1-01
to D1-1-05, D1-1-08 to D1-1-15 |
R |
70 |
60 - 69 |
N |
|
D1-2 |
D1-2-01,
D1-1-06 to D1-1-07, D1-1-16 to D1-1-21 |
R |
70 |
61 - 67 |
N |
|
D2-1 |
D2-1-01 |
R |
70 |
65 - 69 |
N |
|
D2-2 |
D2-2-02 |
R |
70 |
64 - 67 |
N |
|
D2-3 |
D2-3-01
to D2-3-09 |
R |
70 |
62 - 71 |
Y |
|
D2-4 |
D2-4-01
to D2-4-26 |
R |
70 |
59 - 72 |
Y |
|
N2 |
TCW-2 |
TCW-2-01
to TCW-2-03 |
R |
70 |
56 - 67 |
N |
TCW-3 |
TCW-3-01 |
R |
70 |
63 - 65 |
N |
|
TCV-6 |
TCV-6-01
to TCV-6-09 |
R |
70 |
60 - 70 |
N |
|
TCV-7 |
TCV-7-01
to TCV-7-03 |
R |
70 |
62 - 69 |
N |
Notes:
[1] The assessment only include NSRs which
rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise assessment point.
[3] The first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R – Residential Premises, E –
Educational Institutions.
[5] Landuse according to the Recommended
Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[6] Bolded values mean exceedance of the
relevant noise criteria.
Table 4.24d Predicted road traffic noise impact at
planned NSRs under unmitigated scenario (Year 2045)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Predicted Overall L10 1hr,
dB(A) [6] |
Mitigation Measures Required [Y/N] |
N1 |
A1-1 |
A1-1-01a to A1-1-18 |
R |
70 |
43 - 75 |
Y |
A1-2 |
A1-2-01 to A1-2-18 |
R |
70 |
44 - 76 |
Y |
|
A2-1 |
A2-1-01 to A2-1-28 |
R |
70 |
55 - 73 |
Y |
|
A2-2 |
A2-2-01 to A2-2-04, A2-2-06 to A2-2-09 |
R |
70 |
60 - 71 |
Y |
|
A2-3 |
A2-3-01 to A2-3-08 |
R |
70 |
61 - 71 |
Y |
|
A2-4 |
A2-4-01 to A2-4-37 |
R |
70 |
56 - 74 |
Y |
|
B1-1 |
B1-1-01 to B1-1-14 |
R |
70 |
54 -
69 |
N |
|
B1-2 |
B1-2-01 to B1-2-59 |
R |
70 |
55 - 72 |
Y |
|
C0-2 |
C0-2-01 to C0-2-02 |
R |
70 |
56 -
61 |
N |
|
C1-1 |
C1-1-01 to C1-1-57 |
R |
70 |
57 - 73 |
Y |
|
C2-1 |
C2-1-01 to C2-1-13,
C2-2-26 to C2-2-31 |
R |
70 |
59 - 72 |
Y |
|
C2-2 |
C2-2-01 to C2-2-03,
C2-2-14 to C2-2-25 |
R |
70 |
52 - 71 |
Y |
|
D0-3 |
D0-3-01 to D0-3-05 |
E |
65 |
57 - 64 |
N |
|
D0-4 |
D0-4-01 to D0-4-05 |
E |
65 |
57 -
65 |
N |
|
D1-1 |
D1-1-01 to D1-1-05,
D1-1-08 to D1-1-15 |
R |
70 |
62 -
70 |
N |
|
D1-2 |
D1-2-01, D1-1-06 to D1-1-07,
D1-1-16 to D1-1-21 |
R |
70 |
62 -
69 |
N |
|
D2-1 |
D2-1-01 |
R |
70 |
65 -
70 |
N |
|
D2-2 |
D2-2-02 |
R |
70 |
66 -
68 |
N |
|
D2-3 |
D2-3-01 to D2-3-09 |
R |
70 |
62 - 71 |
Y |
|
D2-4 |
D2-4-01 to D2-4-26 |
R |
70 |
60 - 72 |
Y |
|
E0-1 |
E0-1-01 to E0-1-05 |
E |
65 |
61 - 67 |
Y |
|
E0-2 |
E0-2-01 to E0-2-02 |
E |
65 |
60 -
64 |
N |
|
E0-3 |
E0-3-01 to E0-3-04 |
E |
65 |
61 - 66 |
Y |
|
E1-1 |
E1-1-01 to E1-1-02 |
R |
70 |
64 -
69 |
N |
|
E1-4 |
E1-4-01 to E1-4-10 |
R |
70 |
58 - 71 |
Y |
|
E1-5 |
E1-5-01 to E1-5-07 |
R |
70 |
62 - 72 |
Y |
|
E3-1 |
E3-1-01, E3-1-03 to
E3-1-07 |
R |
70 |
59 -
67 |
N |
|
F0-2 |
F0-2-01 to F0-2-02 |
E |
65 |
58 -
63 |
N |
|
F0-3 |
F0-3-01 to F0-3-05 |
E |
65 |
60 -
64 |
N |
|
F0-4 |
F0-4-01, F0-4-03 |
E |
65 |
60 -
62 |
N |
|
F1-1 |
F1-1-01 to F1-1-02,
F1-1-04 |
R |
70 |
66 -
69 |
N |
|
F1-2 |
F1-2-01 to F1-2-04 |
R |
70 |
61 -
68 |
N |
|
F2-1 |
F2-1-01 to F2-1-02 |
R |
70 |
65 -
70 |
N |
|
F2-2 |
F2-2-01 to F2-2-02 |
R |
70 |
49 -
68 |
N |
|
N2 |
TCW-1 |
TCW-1-01 to TCW-1-03 |
R |
70 |
45 -
63 |
N |
TCW-2 |
TCW-2-01 to TCW-2-03 |
R |
70 |
56 -
68 |
N |
|
TCW-3 |
TCW-3-01 |
R |
70 |
63 -
65 |
N |
|
TCV-1 |
TCV-1-01 to TCV-1-05, TCV-1-07 to TCV-1-19 |
R |
70 |
67 - 73 |
Y |
|
TCV-2 |
TCV-2-01 to TCV-2-05 |
R |
70 |
63 - 72 |
Y |
|
TCV-3 |
TCV-3-01 |
R |
70 |
62 -
63 |
N |
|
TCV-4 |
TCV-4-01 to TCV-4-02 |
R |
70 |
55 -
61 |
N |
|
TCV-5a |
TCV-5a-01 to TCV-5a-04 |
R |
70 |
57 -
66 |
N |
|
TCV-5b |
TCV-5b-01 |
R |
70 |
61 -
62 |
N |
|
TCV-6 |
TCV-6-01 to TCV-6-09 |
R |
70 |
62 - 72 |
Y |
|
TCV-7 |
TCV-7-01 to TCV-7-03 |
R |
70 |
62 -
70 |
N |
|
TCV-8 |
TCV-8-01 |
R |
70 |
63 |
N |
Notes:
[1] The assessment only include NSRs which
rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise assessment point.
[3] The first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R – Residential Premises, E –
Educational Institutions.
[5] Landuse according to the Recommended
Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[6] Bolded values mean exceedance of the
relevant noise criteria.
Existing and Committed NSRs (Unmitigated Scenario)
4.5.3.3
From Table 4.23 and Appendix 4.13, it can be found that with the project in place at Year 2023, 2025, 2027 and 2045, the predicted noise levels at the following
existing and committed NSRs would be within the respective criteria:
Table 4.24e Representative
existing and committed NSRs within respective
criteria
Year |
No.[1] |
Uses[2] |
NAP[3] |
2023 |
N2-1 |
V |
MWC-001 to MWC-002 |
N2-2 |
V |
NGA-001 |
|
N2-3 |
V |
LAC-001 |
|
N2-4 |
V |
NIY-001 |
|
N2-5 |
V |
MOK-001 to MOK-002 |
|
N2-6 |
V |
SLP-001 to SLP-004 |
|
N2-7 |
V |
SMK-001 to SMK-002 |
|
N2-8 |
W |
ETe-005 to ETe-008 |
|
N2-9 |
W |
ETe-001 to ETe-004 |
|
N2-10 |
W |
ETe-009 to ETe-011 |
|
N3 |
R |
A54-001 to A54-002, A55a-001 to A55a-005, A55b-001 to A55b-003,
A56-001 to A56-003 |
|
E |
PSc-001 to PSc-002 |
||
N9 |
R |
YTE-001, YTE-003 to YTE-004 |
|
N10 |
V |
SHP-001 |
|
N11 |
V |
HLP-001 |
|
N12 |
V |
WKW-001 |
|
N13 |
V |
LTT-001 |
|
N14 |
E |
ESc-005, ESc-010 |
|
N15 |
E |
ESc-003 to ESc-004, ESc-009 |
|
N17 |
R |
A39-001 to A39-006 |
|
R |
A39-SW-001 to A39-SW-002, A39-SW-004, PSc-005 to PSc-006 |
||
E |
PSc-003 to PSc-004 |
||
N18 |
W, V |
ETe-012; SPA-001 |
|
N19 |
V |
SPA-002 |
|
N20 |
V |
TCB-001 |
|
N28 |
E |
ESc-001 to ESc-002 |
|
N29 |
R |
CAC-001 to CAC-002 |
|
2025 |
N2-1 |
V |
MWC-001 to MWC-002 |
N2-2 |
V |
NGA-001 |
|
N2-3 |
V |
LAC-001 |
|
N2-4 |
V |
NIY-001 |
|
N2-5 |
V |
MOK-001 to MOK-002 |
|
N2-6 |
V |
SLP-001 to SLP-004 |
|
N2-7 |
V |
SMK-001 to SMK-002 |
|
N2-8 |
W |
ETe-005 to ETe-008 |
|
N2-9 |
W |
ETe-001 to ETe-004 |
|
N2-10 |
W |
ETe-009 to ETe-011 |
|
N3 |
R |
A54-001 to A54-002, A55a-001 to A55a-005, A55b-001 to A55b-003, A56-001
to A56-003 |
|
E |
PSc-001 to PSc-002 |
||
N9 |
R |
YTE-001, YTE-003 to YTE-004 |
|
N10 |
V |
SHP-001 |
|
N12 |
V |
WKW-001 |
|
N13 |
V |
LTT-001 |
|
N14 |
E |
ESc-005, ESc-010 |
|
N15 |
E |
ESc-003 to ESc-004, ESc-009 |
|
N17 |
R |
A39-001 to A39-006 |
|
R |
A39-SW-001 to A39-SW-002, A39-SW-004, PSc-005 to PSc-006 |
||
E |
PSc-003 to PSc-004 |
||
N18 |
W, V |
ETe-012; SPA-001 |
|
N19 |
V |
SPA-002 |
|
N20 |
V |
TCB-001 |
|
N28 |
E |
ESc-001 to ESc-002 |
|
N29 |
R |
CAC-001 to CAC-002 |
|
2027 |
N2-1 |
V |
MWC-001 to MWC-002 |
N2-2 |
V |
NGA-001 |
|
N2-3 |
V |
LAC-001 |
|
N2-4 |
V |
NIY-001 |
|
N2-5 |
V |
MOK-001 to MOK-002 |
|
N2-6 |
V |
SLP-001 to SLP-004 |
|
N2-7 |
V |
SMK-001 to SMK-002 |
|
N2-8 |
W |
ETe-005 to ETe-008 |
|
N2-9 |
W |
ETe-001 to ETe-004 |
|
N2-10 |
W |
ETe-009 to ETe-011 |
|
N3 |
R |
A54-001 to A54-002, A55a-001 to A55a-005, A55b-001 to A55b-003,
A56-001 to A56-003 |
|
N9 |
R |
YTE-001, YTE-003 to YTE-004 |
|
N10 |
V |
SHP-001 |
|
N12 |
V |
WKW-001 |
|
N13 |
V |
LTT-001 |
|
N14 |
E |
ESc-005 to ESc-006, ESc-008, ESc-010 |
|
N15 |
E |
ESc-003 to ESc-004, ESc-009 |
|
N17 |
R |
A39-001 to A39-006 |
|
R |
A39-SW-001 to A39-SW-002, A39-SW-004, PSc-005 to PSc-006 |
||
E |
PSc-003 to PSc-004 |
||
N18 |
W, V |
ETe-012; SPA-001 |
|
N19 |
V |
SPA-002 |
|
N20 |
V |
TCB-001 |
|
N28 |
E |
ESc-001 to ESc-002 |
|
N29 |
R |
CAC-001 to CAC-002 |
|
2045 |
N2-1 |
V |
MWC-001 to MWC-002 |
N2-2 |
V |
NGA-001 |
|
N2-3 |
V |
LAC-001 |
|
N2-4 |
V |
NIY-001 |
|
N2-5 |
V |
MOK-001 to MOK-002 |
|
N2-6 |
V |
SLP-001 to SLP-004 |
|
N2-7 |
V |
SMK-001 to SMK-002 |
|
N2-8 |
W |
ETe-005 to ETe-008 |
|
N2-9 |
W |
ETe-001 to ETe-004 |
|
N2-10 |
W |
ETe-009 to ETe-011 |
|
N3 |
R |
A54-001 to A54-002, A55a-001 to A55a-005, A55b-001 to A55b-003,
A56-001 to A56-002 |
|
E |
PSc-001 |
||
N9 |
R |
YTE-001 |
|
N10 |
V |
SHP-001 |
|
N12 |
V |
WKW-001 |
|
N13 |
V |
LTT-001 |
|
N17 |
R |
A39-001 to A39-004 |
|
R |
A39-SW-001 to A39-SW-002, A39-SW-004, PSc-006 |
||
N18 |
W, V |
ETe-012; SPA-001 |
|
N19 |
V |
SPA-002 |
|
N20 |
V |
TCB-001 |
|
N28 |
E |
ESc-001 to ESc-002 |
|
N29 |
R |
CAC-001 |
Notes:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened
windows for ventilation.
[2] R – Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W –
Places of Public Worship, V– Village type development.
[3] NAP – Noise Assessment Point.
4.5.3.4 For some of the existing and committed NSRs, the predicted noise levels under with Project scenario would exceed the respective criteria. Nonetheless, the noise level from the project road (i.e. proposed road network within TCE and TCW, and the proposed Road P1 section) is much less than the criteria and its contribution to the overall noise level is also insignificant (i.e. less than 1.0 dB(A)). These existing and committed NSRs are listed below:
Table 4.24f Representative
existing and committed NSRs exceed respective criteria
but have insignificant project contribution
Year |
No.[1] |
Uses[2] |
NAP[8] |
2023 |
N4 |
R |
TCC-001 |
N9 |
R |
YTE-002 |
|
N12 |
V |
WKW-002 |
|
N17 |
R |
A39-SW-003 |
|
2025 |
N4 |
R |
TCC-001 |
N9 |
R |
YTE-002 |
|
N11 |
V |
HLP-001 |
|
N12 |
V |
WKW-002 |
|
N17 |
R |
A39-SW-003 |
|
2027 |
N3 |
E |
PSc-001 to PSc-002 |
N4 |
R |
TCC-001 |
|
N9 |
R |
YTE-002 |
|
N11 |
V |
HLP-001 |
|
N12 |
V |
WKW-002 |
|
N17 |
R |
A39-SW-003 |
|
2045 |
N3 |
R |
A56-003 |
E |
PSc-002 |
||
N4 |
R |
TCC-001 |
|
N9 |
R |
YTE-002 to YTE-004 |
|
N11 |
V |
HLP-001 |
|
N12 |
V |
WKW-002 |
|
N17 |
R |
A39-SW-003 |
|
N29 |
R |
CAC-002 |
Notes:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened
windows for ventilation.
[2] R – Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W –
Places of Public Worship, V– Village type development.
[3] NAP – Noise Assessment Point.
4.5.3.5
For the remaining existing and committed NSRs, the
predicted noise levels with the Project in place would also exceed the
respective criteria. The impacts are due
to the associated traffic induced by the Project and/or
the proposed road network. The predicted noise levels from the project road at
these locations are higher than the criteria, and its contributions to the
overall noise level are all found significant. The direct mitigation
measures are discussed in Section 4.5.4.
These existing and committed NSRs are listed below:
Table 4.24g Representative existing and committed NSRs exceed respective criteria and require mitigation measures
Year |
No.[1] |
Uses[2] |
NAP[8] |
2023 |
N14 |
E |
ESc-006 to ESc-008 |
2025 |
N14 |
E |
ESc-006 to ESc-008 |
2027 |
N14 |
E |
ESc-007 |
2045 |
N14 |
E |
ESc-005 to ESc-008, ESc-010 |
N15 |
E |
ESc-003 to ESc-004, ESc-009 |
|
N17 |
R |
A39-005, A39-006, PSc-005 |
|
E |
PSc-003 to PSc-004 |
Notes:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened
windows for ventilation.
[2] R – Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W –
Places of Public Worship, V– Village type development.
[3] NAP – Noise Assessment Point.
4.5.3.6
The predicted noise levels at
Lantau North (Extension) Country Park (LNCP-001, LNCP-004 to LNCP-006) near TCE
range from 71 to 77dB(A) with associated contribution from project roads range
from 0.0 to 0.2dB(A). The predicted noise levels at Lantau North (Extension)
Country Park (LNCP-002 to LNCP-003, LNCP-008 to LNCP-009) near TCW are not
exceeding respective criteria. Hence, the contribution from projects road is
insignificant. In addition, given the transient nature of visitor using hiking
trails, adverse road traffic noise impacts are not anticipated.
Planned NSRs (Unmitigated Scenario)
4.5.3.7
From Table 4.24 and Appendix 4.13, the predicted noise levels at Year 2023, 2025, 2027
and 2045 at the following planned NSRs under with Project scenario would exceed
the respective noise criteria:
Table 4.24h Representative planned NSRs exceed respective criteria and require mitigation measures
Year |
No.[1] |
Uses[2] |
Zoning |
NAP |
2023 |
N1 |
R |
Nil |
Nil |
2025 |
N1 |
R |
B1-2 |
B1-2-08 to
B1-2-09, B1-2-25 to B1-2-26 |
D1-1 |
D1-1-02 to D1-1-05 |
|||
D1-2 |
D1-1-06 to
D1-1-07 |
|||
D2-3 |
D2-3-01, D2-3-06 |
|||
D2-4 |
D2-4-01 to
D2-4-02, D2-4-04, D2-4-06 to D2-4-11 |
|||
E |
D0-3 |
D0-3-02, D0-3-04
to D0-3-05 |
||
D0-4 |
D0-4-01 to
D0-4-02, D0-4-04 |
|||
2027 |
N1 |
R |
A1-1 |
A1-1-01a to
A1-1-01b, A1-1-02a to A1-1-02b, A1-1-04a, A1-1-04g, A1-1-05a |
A1-2 |
A1-2-02a to
A1-2-02b, A1-2-05g |
|||
A2-1 |
A2-1-01 to
A2-1-02, A2-1-17, A2-1-26 |
|||
B1-1 |
B1-1-02 to
B1-1-03, B1-1-05 to B1-1-06 |
|||
B1-2 |
B1-2-02 to
B1-2-03, B1-2-08 to B1-2-09, B1-2-12 to B1-2-13, B1-2-25 to B1-2-26, B1-2-29
to B1-2-31, B1-2-36, B1-2-44 to B1-2-45 |
|||
D2-3 |
D2-3-01 |
|||
D2-4 |
D2-4-01, D2-4-06 |
|||
2045 |
N1 |
R |
A1-1 |
A1-1-01a to
A1-1-01b, A1-1-02a to A1-1-02b, A1-1-04a, A1-1-04g, A1-1-05a, A1-1-05g |
A1-2 |
A1-2-01 to
A1-2-01b, A1-2-02a to A1-2-02b, A1-2-04a to A1-2-04b, A1-2-04g, A1-2-04l,
A1-2-05a, A1-2-05g, A1-2-05l |
|||
A2-1 |
A2-1-01 to
A2-1-06, A2-1-12, A2-1-17, A2-1-19 to A2-1-22, A2-1-24 to A2-1-26, A2-1-28 |
|||
A2-2 |
A2-2-01,
A2-2-04, A2-2-07, A2-2-08 |
|||
A2-3 |
A2-3-02,
A2-3-03, A2-3-07, A2-3-08 |
|||
A2-4 |
A2-4-01 to
A2-4-08, A2-4-10 to A2-4-11, A2-4-13 to A2-4-15, A2-4-17 to A2-4-22, A2-4-24
to A2-4-25, A2-4-29, A2-4-34, A2-4-37 |
|||
B1-2 |
B1-2-08 to
B1-2-09, B1-2-25 to B1-2-26, B1-2-44 to B1-2-45 |
|||
C1-1 |
C1-1-01 to
C1-1-03, C1-1-08, C1-1-15, C1-1-19, C1-1-21 to C1-1-22, C1-1-29 to C1-1-31,
C1-1-36 to C1-1-37, C1-1-42 to C1-1-43, C1-1-49, C1-1-51, C1-1-53, C1-1-55 |
|||
C2-1 |
C2-1-01,
C2-1-03, C2-1-12 to C2-1-13, C2-2-26 to C2-2-27 |
|||
C2-2 |
C2-2-14 to
C2-2-15, C2-2-20 to C2-2-21 |
|||
D2-3 |
D2-3-06, D2-3-01 |
|||
D2-4 |
D2-4-01,
D2-4-06, D2-4-07, D2-4-11 |
|||
E1-4 |
E1-4-04a to E1-4-04b,
E1-4-06a to E1-4-06d |
|||
E1-5 |
E1-5-01, E1-5-07 |
|||
E |
E0-1 |
E0-1-02, E0-1-04
to E0-1-05 |
||
E0-3 |
E0-3-01, E0-3-03 |
|||
N2 |
R |
TCV-1 |
TCV-1-03,
TCV-1-04a to TCV-1-04b, TCV-1-05a to TCV-1-05c, TCV-1-07 to TCV-1-09,
TCV-1-14a, TCV-1-16a to TCV-1-16c, TCV-1-19 |
|
TCV-2 |
TCV-2-03 to
TCV-2-04 |
|||
TCV-6 |
TCV-6-02,
TCV-6-06 |
Notes:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened
windows for ventilation.
[2] R – Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W –
Places of Public Worship, V– Village type development.
[3] NAP - Noise Assessment Point.
4.5.3.8
The
total number of dwellings, classrooms and other noise sensitive receivers that
will be exposed to noise impact exceeding the criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM
has been calculated. It is predicted that a total of about 40 classrooms at
Year 2023, about 130 dwellings and 70 classrooms at
Year 2025, about 270 dwellings and 2 classrooms at Year 2027 and about 1050
dwellings and 160 classrooms at Year 2045 will expose to noise impact.
4.5.3.9
The direct mitigation measures are discussed in Section 4.5.4. All remaining planned NSRs would comply with the respective noise criteria.
4.5.4 Mitigation of Road Traffic Noise Impact
Direct Mitigation Measures
4.5.4.1
As discussed in Section 4.5.3,
mitigations measures are required for a number of planned NSRs within TCE and
both planned and existing NSRs within TCW. It should be noted the design and layout of the new town extension have proactively
located some commercial buildings between residential buildings and NLH to
provide noise screening. This helps to
avoid traffic noise impacts from NLH as much as practicable at the outset.
Notwithstanding the above, the road traffic noise from local roads within the
development areas and the adverse residual influence from NLH would
still cause noise impacts to some NSRs and hence other noise mitigation
measures are required. It has been demonstrated that the noise impacts can be
mitigated to an acceptable level by employing a package of mitigation measures
including 1) noise barriers along some road sections or boundary walls within development sites; 2) application of low noise road surfacing materials on some road
sections; and 3) suitable treatment on end walls, arranging noise tolerant
portions of buildings in internal layout design, and architectural fins in some
buildings. However, there is scope for
adoption of alternative noise mitigation measures, for example, by means of
alternative layout and design of individual developments at detailed design
stage. Besides, possibility of use of new road surfacing material with
considerable traffic noise reduction capability may be explored when test
results on its application in Hong Kong are available. An environmental review
may be conducted in due course to study how the use of new road surfacing
material could help reduce traffic noise impacts and minimise the scale/extent
of the proposed noise mitigation measures. A summary of all these proposed mitigation
measures is Table 4.25. Figure
4.14
shows the extent and location of proposed mitigation measures within TCE and
TCW. The overall mitigation measures for road traffic noise and railway noise
are given in Figure 4.16.
4.5.4.2 Besides, as discussed in Section 4.5.2, the assessment has based on the timely implementation of the noise non-sensitive building to the north of NLH / existing railway. This arrangement has been agreed with Planning Department and Lands Department.
4.5.4.3
Results for mitigated case
are shown in Tables 4.26 and 4.27 and details could be found in Appendix 4.14. It can be seen that with the provision of the
recommended mitigation measures, the traffic noise levels at all existing and planned
NSRs will comply with the respective criterion.
Table 4.25a Extents and locations of proposed mitigation measures at 2023
Zoning |
Location |
Type
of Mitigation Measures[1] [2] |
Key
NAPs Protected[3] |
TCE |
|||
B1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
B1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
- |
B1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
B1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
- |
TCW |
|||
TCV-6 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
- |
Possible School
Development near Tung Chung Area 39 |
Approx.
50m long, 4m high school boundary wall |
- |
- |
Corner at junction
between Chung Mun Road and Road L24 |
Approx.
120m long, 5m high vertical barrier with 3m cantilevered arm at 45o |
ESc-006
to ESc-008 |
- |
Along Chung Mun Road |
Approx.
210m long LNRS |
ESc-006
to ESc-008 |
- |
Along Road L24 |
Approx.
160m long LNRS |
ESc-006
to ESc-008 |
- |
Along Road L30 |
Approx.
160m long LNRS |
- |
Notes:
[1] Details are shown in Figure 4.14a.
[2] LNRS – Low Noise Road Surfacing Materials
[3] “-“ indicates mitigation measures required to be constructed for
NAPs exposed to noise exceedance at other phases (see Tables 4.25a - d).
[4] An environmental review may be conducted in due course
to study how the use of new road surfacing material could help reduce traffic
noise impacts and minimise the scale/extent of the proposed noise mitigation
measures.
Table 4.25b Extents and locations of proposed mitigation measures at 2025
Zoning |
Location |
Type
of Mitigation Measures[1] [2] |
Key
NAPs Protected[3] |
TCE |
|||
B1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
B1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
- |
B1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
B1-2-08
to B1-2-09, B1-2-25 to B1-2-26 |
B1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
- |
D0-3 |
Along Road L3 |
Approx.
60m long, 5m high school boundary wall |
D0-3-02,
D0-3-04 to D0-3-05 |
D0-4 |
Along Road L3 |
Approx.
70m long, 5m high school boundary wall with 3m cantilevered arm at 45o |
D0-4-01
to D0-4-02, D0-4-04 |
D1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
D1-1-02
to D1-1-05 |
D1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
D1-1-06
to D1-1-07 |
D2-3 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
D2-3-01,
D2-3-06 |
D2-4 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
D2-4-01,
D2-4-06 to D2-4-11 |
D2-4 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
D2-4-02,
D2-4-04 |
TCW |
|||
TCV-6 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
- |
Possible School
Development near Tung Chung Area 39 |
Approx.
50m long, 4m high school boundary wall |
- |
- |
Corner at junction
between Chung Mun Road and Road L24 |
Approx.
120m long, 5m high vertical barrier with 3m cantilevered arm at 45o |
ESc-006
to ESc-008 |
- |
Along Chung Mun Road |
Approx.
210m long LNRS |
ESc-006
to ESc-008 |
- |
Along Road L24 |
Approx.
160m long LNRS |
ESc-006
to ESc-008 |
- |
Along Road L30 |
Approx.
160m long LNRS |
- |
Notes:
[1] Details are shown in Figure 4.14b.
[2] LNRS – Low Noise Road Surfacing Materials.
[3] “-“ indicates mitigation measures required to be constructed for
NAPs exposed to noise exceedance at other phases (see Tables 4.25a - d).
[4] An environmental review may be conducted in due course
to study how the use of new road surfacing material could help reduce traffic
noise impacts and minimise the scale/extent of the proposed noise mitigation
measures.
Table 4.25c Extents and locations of proposed mitigation measures at 2027
Zoning |
Location |
Type
of Mitigation Measures[1] [2] |
Key
NAPs Protected[3] |
TCE |
|||
A1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
A1-1-01a
to A1-1-01b, A1-1-02a to A1-1-02b |
A1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.8m
long architectural fin |
A1-1-04a,
A1-1-04g, A1-1-05a |
A1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
A1-2-02a
to A1-2-02b, A1-2-05g |
A1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.8m
long architectural fin |
- |
A2-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
A2-1-01
to A2-1-02, A2-1-17, A2-1-26 |
A2-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
- |
A2-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.8m
long architectural fin |
- |
A2-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
A2-3 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
A2-4 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
A2-4 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
- |
A2-4 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.8m
long architectural fin |
- |
B1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
B1-1-02
to B1-1-03, B1-1-05 |
B1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
B1-1-06 |
B1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
B1-2-02
to B1-2-03, B1-2-08 to B1-2-09, B1-2-25 to
B1-2-26, B1-2-31, B1-2-36, B1-2-44 to B1-2-45 |
B1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
B1-2-12
to B1-2-13, B1-2-29 to B1-2-30 |
D0-3 |
Along Road L3 |
Approx.
60m long, 5m high school boundary wall |
- |
D0-4 |
Along Road L3 |
Approx.
70m long, 5m high school boundary wall with 3m cantilevered arm at 45o |
- |
D1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
D1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
D2-3 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
D2-3-01 |
D2-4 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
D2-4-01,
D2-4-06 |
D2-4 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
- |
TCW |
|||
TCV-6 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
- |
Possible School
Development near Tung Chung Area 39 |
Approx.
50m long, 4m high school boundary wall |
- |
- |
Corner at junction
between Chung Mun Road and Road L24 |
Approx.
120m long, 5m high vertical barrier with 3m cantilevered arm at 45o |
ESc-007 |
- |
Along Chung Mun Road |
Approx.
210m long LNRS |
ESc-007 |
- |
Along Road L24 |
Approx.
160m long LNRS |
ESc-007 |
- |
Along Road L30 |
Approx.
160m long LNRS |
- |
Notes:
[1] Details are shown in Figure 4.14c.
[2] LNRS – Low Noise Road Surfacing Materials.
[3] “-“ indicates mitigation measures required to be constructed for
NAPs exposed to noise exceedance at other phases (see Tables 4.25a - d).
[4] An environmental
review may be conducted in due course to study how the use of new road
surfacing material could help reduce traffic noise impacts and minimise the
scale/extent of the proposed noise mitigation measures.
Table 4.25d Extents and locations of proposed mitigation measures at 2045
Zoning |
Location |
Type
of Mitigation Measures[1] [2] |
Key
NAPs Protected[3] |
TCE |
|||
A1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
A1-1-01a
to A1-1-01b, A1-1-02a to A1-1-02b, A1-1-05g |
A1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.8m
long architectural fin |
A1-1-04a,
A1-1-04g, A1-1-05a |
A1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
A1-2-01
to A1-2-01b, A1-2-02a to A1-2-02b, A1-2-04a, A1-2-04g, A1-2-05g |
A1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.8m
long architectural fin |
A1-2-04b,
A1-2-04l, A1-2-05a, A1-2-05l |
A2-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
A2-1-01
to A2-1-04, A2-1-17, A2-1-19 to A2-1-21,
A2-1-25 to A2-1-26 |
A2-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
A2-1-05,
A2-1-12, A2-1-22, A2-1-24 |
A2-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.8m
long architectural fin |
A2-1-06,
A2-1-28 |
A2-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
A2-2-01,
A2-2-04, A2-2-07 to A2-2-08 |
A2-3 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
A2-3-02
to A2-3-03, A2-3-07 to A2-3-08 |
A2-4 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
A2-4-01
to A2-4-04, A2-4-13, A2-4-15, A2-4-18, A2-4-21, A2-4-25, A2-4-29 |
A2-4 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
A2-4-07,
A2-4-14, A2-4-19, A2-4-24 |
A2-4 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.8m
long architectural fin |
A2-4-05
to A2-4-06, A2-4-08, A2-4-10, A2-4-20, A2-4-34, A2-4-37 |
A2-4 |
Along Road D3 |
Approx.
100m long, 5m high absorptive vertical barrier |
A2-4-11,
A2-4-17, A2-4-22 |
B1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
B1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
- |
B1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
B1-2-08
to B1-2-09, B1-2-25 to B1-2-26, B1-2-44 to B1-2-45 |
B1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
- |
C1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
C1-1-01
to C1-1-03, C1-1-08, C1-1-19, C1-1-21 to C1-1-22, C1-1-30 to C1-1-31, C1-1-36
to C1-1-37, C1-1-42 to C1-1-43, C1-1-49 |
C1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
C1-1-15 |
C1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.8m
long architectural fin |
C1-1-29,
C1-1-51, C1-1-55 |
C1-1 |
Along Road L7 |
Approx.
50m long, 5m high absorptive vertical barrier with 3m cantilevered arm at 45o |
C1-1-53 |
C2-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
C2-1-01,
C2-1-03, C2-1-12 to C2-1-13 |
C2-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
C2-2-14
to C2-2-15, C2-2-20 to C2-2-21, C2-2-26 to C2-2-27 |
D0-3 |
Along Road L3 |
Approx.
60m long, 5m high school boundary wall |
- |
D0-4 |
Along Road L3 |
Approx.
70m long, 5m high school boundary wall with 3m cantilevered arm at 45o |
- |
D1-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
D1-2 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
- |
D2-3 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
D2-3-01,
D2-3-06 |
D2-4 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
D2-4-01,
D2-4-06 to D2-4-07, D2-4-11 |
D2-4 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
- |
E0-1 |
Along Road L2 |
Approx.
80m long, 4m high school boundary wall |
E0-1-02,
E0-1-04 and E0-1-05 |
E0-3 |
Along Road L2 |
Approx.
40m long, 3m high school boundary wall |
E0-3-01,
E0-3-03 |
E1-4 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade with no openable window |
E1-4-04a
to E1-4-04b, E1-4-06a to E1-4-06d |
E1-5 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
E1-5-01,
E1-5-07 |
TCW |
|||
TCV-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
TCV-1-03,
TCV-1-07 to TCV-1-08, TCV-1-19 |
TCV-1 |
Facade of residential
block |
1.5m
long architectural fin |
TCV-1-04a
to TCV-1-04b, TCV-1-05a to TCV-1-05c |
TCV-6 |
Facade of residential
block |
Facade
with no openable window |
TCV-6-02,
TCV-6-06 |
- |
Possible School
Development near Tung Chung Area 39 |
Approx.
50m long, 4m high school boundary wall |
PSc-003 |
- |
Corner at junction
between Chung Mun Road and Road L24 |
Approx.
120m long, 5m high vertical barrier with 3m cantilevered arm at 45o |
ESc-006
to ESc-008 |
- |
Along Chung Mun Road |
Approx.
210m long LNRS |
A39-005
to A39-006, PSc-004 to PSc-005, TCV-1-09, TCV-1-14a, TCV-1-16a to TCV-1-16c,
ESc-006 to ESc-008 |
- |
Along Road L24 |
Approx.
160m long LNRS |
ESc-004
to ESc-008, ESc-010, TCV-2-03 to TCV-2-04 |
- |
Along Road L30 |
Approx.
160m long LNRS |
ESc-003,
ESc-009 |
Notes:
[1] Details are shown in Figure 4.14d.
[2] LNRS – Low Noise Road Surfacing Materials.
[3] “-“ indicates mitigation measures required to be constructed for
NAPs exposed to noise exceedance at other phases (see Tables 4.25a - d).
[4] An environmental review may be conducted in due course
to study how the use of new road surfacing material could help reduce traffic
noise impacts and minimise the scale/extent of the proposed noise mitigation
measures.
[5] The planned
Police Married Quarters (C0-2) has been designed to have all the openable
window facing north to enjoy a better view.
Table 4.26a Predicted
road traffic noise impact at existing and committed NSRs under mitigated scenario
(Year 2023)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Noise Impact, L10
1hr dB(A) [6] |
Project Road
Contribution, dB(A) |
Mitigation Measures
Required [Y/N] |
||
Project Road |
Other Road |
Overall |
|||||||
N2-1[7] |
Ma Wan Chung |
MWC-001 to MWC-002 |
V |
70 |
54 - 58 |
52 - 57 |
56 - 60 |
3.6 - 4.7 |
N |
N2-2[7] |
Ngau
Au and Tung Hing |
NGA-001 |
V |
70 |
44 - 45 |
33 - 35 |
44 - 45 |
10.5 - 11.7 |
N |
N2-3[7] |
Lam
Che |
LAC-001 |
V |
70 |
37 |
15 - 17 |
37 |
20.5 - 21.7 |
N |
N2-4[7] |
Nim
Yuen |
NIY-001 |
V |
70 |
35 |
6 |
35 |
29.6 - 29.7 |
N |
N2-5[7] |
Mok
Ka |
MOK-001 to MOK-002 |
V |
70 |
40 - 42 |
24 - 29 |
40 - 42 |
13.3 - 15.9 |
N |
N2-6[7] |
Shek
Lau Po |
SLP-001 to SLP-004 |
V |
70 |
29 - 62 |
0 - 50 |
29 - 62 |
10.4 - 43.7 |
N |
N2-7[7] |
Shek
Mun Kap |
SMK-001 to SMK-002 |
V |
70 |
53 - 56 |
39 - 51 |
53 - 58 |
6.2 - 15.1 |
N |
N2-8[7] |
Temple |
ETe-005 to ETe-008 |
W |
65 |
44 - 54 |
38 - 52 |
45 - 56 |
2.9 - 7.0 |
N |
N2-9[7] |
Prajna
Dhyana Temple |
ETe-001 to ETe-004 |
W |
65 |
46 - 55 |
43 - 61 |
53 - 61 |
0.3 - 10.4 |
N |
N2-10[7] |
Hau Wong Temple |
ETe-009 to ETe-011 |
W |
65 |
47 - 53 |
30 - 45 |
50 - 54 |
4.2 - 19.3 |
N |
N3[8] |
Reclamation
Area next to Tung Chung East |
A54-001 to A54-002 |
R |
70 |
6 - 67 |
58 - 68 |
64 - 69 |
0.0 - 5.8 |
N |
A55a-001 to A55a-005 |
R |
70 |
12 - 59 |
48 - 64 |
48 - 64 |
0.0 - 4.3 |
N |
||
A55b-001 to A55b-003 |
R |
70 |
28 - 56 |
59 - 65 |
59 - 65 |
0.0 - 1.4 |
N |
||
A56-001 to A56-003 |
R |
70 |
50 - 66 |
48 - 68 |
59 - 68 |
0.0 - 13.7 |
N |
||
PSc-001 to PSc-002 |
E |
65 |
42 - 57 |
63 - 65 |
64 - 65 |
0.0 - 1.1 |
N |
||
N4 |
Tung
Chung Crescent |
TCC-001 |
R |
70 |
43 - 48 |
66 - 72 |
66 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N9 |
Yat
Tung Estate |
YTE-001 to YTE-004 |
R |
70 |
0 - 63 |
60 - 72 |
62 - 72 |
0.0 - 2.4 |
N |
N10 |
Sheung
Ling Pei |
SHP-001 |
V |
70 |
25 - 31 |
66 |
66 |
0.0 |
N |
N11 |
Ha Ling Pei |
HLP-001 |
V |
70 |
46 - 47 |
70 |
70 |
0.0 |
N |
N12 |
Wong Ka Wai |
WKW-001 to WKW-002 |
V |
70 |
27 - 52 |
67 - 71 |
67 -
71 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N13 |
Lung Tseng Tau |
LTT-001 |
V |
70 |
58 |
66 |
66 - 67 |
0.6 - 0.7 |
N |
N14 |
YMCA
of Hong Kong Christian College |
ESc-005 to ESc-008, ESc-010 |
E |
65 |
59 - 62 |
28 - 44 |
60 - 62 |
15.6 - 32.3 |
N |
N15 |
Caritas
Charles Vath College |
ESc-003 to ESc-004, ESc-009 |
E |
65 |
61 - 63 |
36 - 53 |
61 - 63 |
9.6 - 26.4 |
N |
N17[9][10] |
Possible
Public Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39 |
A39-001 to A39-006 |
R |
70 |
50 - 66 |
23 - 67 |
59 - 67 |
0.1 - 40.7 |
N |
Social Welfare Facilities at Tung
Chung Area 39 |
A39-SW-001 to A39-SW-004 |
R |
70 |
20 - 55 |
63 - 71 |
63 -
71 |
0.0 - 0.5 |
N |
|
Possible School Development near Tung
Chung Area 39 (with boarding blocks) |
PSc-003 to PSc-004 |
E |
65 |
51 - 60 |
32 - 52 |
52 - 60 |
6.5 - 27.8 |
N |
|
PSc-005 to PSc-006 |
R |
70 |
54 - 64 |
33 - 47 |
55 - 64 |
7.8 - 31.2 |
N |
||
N18 |
Temple
and Houses in Shek Pik Au |
ETe-012 |
W |
65 |
26 |
41 |
41 |
0.1 |
N |
SPA-001 |
V |
70 |
36 - 37 |
39 |
41 |
1.8 - 2.1 |
N |
||
N19 |
Scattered
Houses near Shek Pik Au |
SPA-002 |
V |
70 |
28 - 29 |
30 |
32 - 33 |
1.9 - 2.7 |
N |
N20 |
Scattered
Houses near Tung Chung Bay |
TCB-001 |
V |
70 |
22 - 24 |
26 - 27 |
28 - 29 |
1.3 - 1.8 |
N |
N28 |
Ho Yu College and Ho Yu Primary
School |
ESc-001 to ESc-002 |
E |
65 |
6 - 20 |
45 - 59 |
45 - 59 |
0.0 |
N |
N29 |
Caribbean Coast |
CAC-001 to CAC-002 |
R |
70 |
26 - 32 |
63 - 69 |
63 - 69 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N31 |
Lantau North (Extension) Country Park |
LNCP-001 to LNCP-006, LNCP-008 to LNCP-009 |
O |
N/A |
0 - 46 |
38 - 74 |
41 - 74 |
0.0 - 8.0 |
N/A |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP
– Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W – Places of Public
Worship, V– Village type development, O – Others.
[5] Landuse
according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[6] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
[7] Existing
NSRs retained within TCW.
[8] According
to the latest information from the “Proposed Residential / Commercial
Development at TCTL 36, Tung Chung”, “Proposed Residential Development at Tung
Chung Area 55B, TCTL No. 37” and “Public Rental Housing Development at Area 56,
Tung Chung”.
[9] The
development layout and no. of storey have been based on the “Planning Brief for
Public Rental Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39”.
[10] PSc-005
to PSc-006 represent the boarding blocks of the planned school near Area 39.
[11] N/A
– Not applicable.
Table 4.26b Predicted road
traffic noise impact at existing and
committed NSRs under mitigated scenario (Year 2025)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Noise Impact, L10
1hr dB(A) [6] |
Project Road
Contribution, dB(A) |
Mitigation Measures
Required [Y/N] |
||
Project Road |
Other Road |
Overall |
|||||||
N2-1[7] |
Ma Wan Chung |
MWC-001 to MWC-002 |
V |
70 |
54 - 58 |
54 - 58 |
57 - 61 |
2.9 - 3.7 |
N |
N2-2[7] |
Ngau
Au and Tung Hing |
NGA-001 |
V |
70 |
44 - 45 |
33 - 35 |
44 - 45 |
10.4 - 11.5 |
N |
N2-3[7] |
Lam
Che |
LAC-001 |
V |
70 |
37 |
15 - 17 |
37 |
20.3 - 21.5 |
N |
N2-4[7] |
Nim
Yuen |
NIY-001 |
V |
70 |
35 |
6 |
35 |
29.0 |
N |
N2-5[7] |
Mok
Ka |
MOK-001 to MOK-002 |
V |
70 |
40 - 42 |
24 - 34 |
40 - 43 |
8.9 - 15.8 |
N |
N2-6[7] |
Shek
Lau Po |
SLP-001 to SLP-004 |
V |
70 |
29 - 62 |
0 - 50 |
29 - 62 |
10.2 - 43.5 |
N |
N2-7[7] |
Shek
Mun Kap |
SMK-001 to SMK-002 |
V |
70 |
55 - 58 |
47 - 51 |
55 - 58 |
6.9 - 9.1 |
N |
N2-8[7] |
Temple |
ETe-005 to ETe-008 |
W |
65 |
46 - 55 |
40 - 52 |
47 - 57 |
3.1 - 6.9 |
N |
N2-9[7] |
Prajna
Dhyana Temple |
ETe-001 to ETe-004 |
W |
65 |
46 - 56 |
43 - 61 |
53 - 61 |
0.3 - 10.4 |
N |
N2-10[7] |
Hau Wong Temple |
ETe-009 to ETe-011 |
W |
65 |
48 - 53 |
31 - 46 |
50 - 54 |
4.1 - 19.3 |
N |
N3[8] |
Reclamation
Area next to Tung Chung East |
A54-001 to A54-002 |
R |
70 |
6 - 68 |
59 - 69 |
65 - 69 |
0.0 - 6.1 |
N |
A55a-001 to A55a-005 |
R |
70 |
12 - 52 |
47 - 64 |
47 - 64 |
0.0 - 2.1 |
N |
||
A55b-001 to A55b-003 |
R |
70 |
30 - 53 |
56 - 64 |
58 - 64 |
0.0 - 1.6 |
N |
||
A56-001 to A56-003 |
R |
70 |
51 - 67 |
46 - 68 |
59 - 68 |
0.0 - 17.5 |
N |
||
PSc-001 to PSc-002 |
E |
65 |
44 - 55 |
59 - 63 |
61 - 63 |
0.0 - 1.2 |
N |
||
N4 |
Tung
Chung Crescent |
TCC-001 |
R |
70 |
43 - 48 |
66 - 72 |
66 -
72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N9 |
Yat
Tung Estate |
YTE-001 to YTE-004 |
R |
70 |
0 - 63 |
61 - 72 |
63 - 72 |
0.0 - 1.6 |
N |
N10 |
Sheung
Ling Pei |
SHP-001 |
V |
70 |
26 - 31 |
66 |
66 |
0.0 |
N |
N11 |
Ha Ling Pei |
HLP-001 |
V |
70 |
47 |
70 |
70 - 71 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N12 |
Wong Ka Wai |
WKW-001 to WKW-002 |
V |
70 |
27 - 53 |
68 - 72 |
68 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N13 |
Lung Tseng Tau |
LTT-001 |
V |
70 |
58 |
66 |
67 |
0.6 |
N |
N14 |
YMCA
of Hong Kong Christian College |
ESc-005 to ESc-008, ESc-010 |
E |
65 |
59 - 62 |
28 - 44 |
60 - 62 |
15.4 - 32.4 |
N |
N15 |
Caritas
Charles Vath College |
ESc-003 to ESc-004, ESc-009 |
E |
65 |
61 - 63 |
36 - 53 |
62 - 63 |
9.4 - 26.4 |
N |
N17[9][10] |
Possible
Public Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39 |
A39-001 to A39-006 |
R |
70 |
50 - 66 |
24 - 68 |
58 - 68 |
0.1 - 40.2 |
N |
Social Welfare Facilities at Tung
Chung Area 39 |
A39-SW-001 to A39-SW-004 |
R |
70 |
20 - 55 |
64 - 72 |
64 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.5 |
N |
|
Possible School Development near Tung
Chung Area 39 (with boarding blocks) |
PSc-003 to PSc-004 |
E |
65 |
51 - 60 |
32 - 53 |
52 - 60 |
6.4 - 27.6 |
N |
|
PSc-005 to PSc-006 |
R |
70 |
54 - 64 |
33 - 48 |
55 - 64 |
7.2 - 31.0 |
N |
||
N18 |
Temple
and Houses in Shek Pik Au |
ETe-012 |
W |
65 |
28 |
43 |
43 - 44 |
0.1 |
N |
SPA-001 |
V |
70 |
37 - 38 |
47 |
48 |
0.4 - 0.5 |
N |
||
N19 |
Scattered
Houses near Shek Pik Au |
SPA-002 |
V |
70 |
28 - 30 |
38 |
39 |
0.3 - 0.5 |
N |
N20 |
Scattered
Houses near Tung Chung Bay |
TCB-001 |
V |
70 |
22 - 24 |
27 - 28 |
28 - 29 |
1.3 - 1.6 |
N |
N28 |
Ho Yu College and Ho Yu Primary
School |
ESc-001 to ESc-002 |
E |
65 |
10 - 21 |
43 - 59 |
43 - 59 |
0.0 |
N |
N29 |
Caribbean Coast |
CAC-001 to CAC-002 |
R |
70 |
27 - 32 |
62 - 69 |
62 - 69 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N31 |
Lantau North (Extension) Country Park |
LNCP-001 to LNCP-006, LNCP-008 to LNCP-009 |
O |
N/A |
0 - 57 |
39 - 74 |
41 - 74 |
0.0 - 7.9 |
N/A |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP
– Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W – Places of Public
Worship, V– Village type development, O - Others
[5] Landuse
according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[6] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
[7] Existing
NSRs retained within TCW.
[8] According
to the latest information from the “Proposed Residential / Commercial
Development at TCTL 36, Tung Chung”, “Proposed Residential Development at Tung
Chung Area 55B, TCTL No. 37” and “Public Rental Housing Development at Area 56,
Tung Chung”.
[9] The
development layout and no. of storey have been based on the “Planning Brief for
Public Rental Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39”.
[10] PSc-005
to PSc-006 represent the boarding blocks of the planned school near Area 39.
[11] Not
Applicable.
Table 4.26c Predicted road
traffic noise impact at existing and
committed NSRs under mitigated scenario (Year 2027)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Noise Impact, L10
1hr dB(A) [6] |
Project Road
Contribution, dB(A) |
Mitigation Measures
Required [Y/N] |
||
Project Road |
Other Road |
Overall |
|||||||
N2-1[7] |
Ma Wan Chung |
MWC-001 to MWC-002 |
V |
70 |
54 - 58 |
54 - 58 |
57 - 61 |
2.9 - 3.8 |
N |
N2-2[7] |
Ngau
Au and Tung Hing |
NGA-001 |
V |
70 |
43 - 44 |
31 - 34 |
43 - 44 |
10.3 - 11.6 |
N |
N2-3[7] |
Lam
Che |
LAC-001 |
V |
70 |
37 |
16 - 17 |
37 |
20.0 - 21.2 |
N |
N2-4[7] |
Nim
Yuen |
NIY-001 |
V |
70 |
34 |
7 |
34 |
27.3 |
N |
N2-5[7] |
Mok
Ka |
MOK-001 to MOK-002 |
V |
70 |
39 - 41 |
24 - 34 |
39 - 42 |
8.0 - 15.2 |
N |
N2-6[7] |
Shek
Lau Po |
SLP-001 to SLP-004 |
V |
70 |
29 - 60 |
0 - 50 |
29 - 60 |
9.8 - 41.6 |
N |
N2-7[7] |
Shek
Mun Kap |
SMK-001 to SMK-002 |
V |
70 |
55 - 57 |
47 - 52 |
55 - 58 |
6.4 - 9.1 |
N |
N2-8[7] |
Temple |
ETe-005 to ETe-008 |
W |
65 |
46 - 54 |
40 - 53 |
47 - 57 |
2.7 - 6.7 |
N |
N2-9[7] |
Prajna
Dhyana Temple |
ETe-001 to ETe-004 |
W |
65 |
46 - 55 |
43 - 61 |
53 - 61 |
0.3 - 9.6 |
N |
N2-10[7] |
Hau Wong Temple |
ETe-009 to ETe-011 |
W |
65 |
47 - 53 |
29 - 45 |
50 - 54 |
4.2 - 20.5 |
N |
N3[8] |
Reclamation
Area next to Tung Chung East |
A54-001 to A54-002 |
R |
70 |
6 - 64 |
56 - 67 |
61 - 67 |
0.0 - 5.2 |
N |
A55a-001 to A55a-005 |
R |
70 |
16 - 52 |
49 - 64 |
49 - 64 |
0.0 - 1.4 |
N |
||
A55b-001 to A55b-003 |
R |
70 |
33 - 55 |
60 - 68 |
60 - 68 |
0.0 - 0.6 |
N |
||
A56-001 to A56-003 |
R |
70 |
55 - 69 |
51 - 69 |
63 - 69 |
0.2 - 13.8 |
N |
||
PSc-001 to PSc-002 |
E |
65 |
48 - 58 |
66 |
66
- 67 |
0.0 - 0.7 |
N |
||
N4 |
Tung
Chung Crescent |
TCC-001 |
R |
70 |
43 - 48 |
66 - 72 |
66 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N9 |
Yat
Tung Estate |
YTE-001 to YTE-004 |
R |
70 |
0 - 63 |
62 - 72 |
63 - 72 |
0.0 - 1.6 |
N |
N10 |
Sheung
Ling Pei |
SHP-001 |
V |
70 |
25 - 31 |
66 |
66 |
0.0 |
N |
N11 |
Ha Ling Pei |
HLP-001 |
V |
70 |
46 |
71 |
71 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N12 |
Wong Ka Wai |
WKW-001 to WKW-002 |
V |
70 |
26 - 51 |
68 - 72 |
68 - 72 |
0.0 |
N |
N13 |
Lung Tseng Tau |
LTT-001 |
V |
70 |
56 |
67 |
67 |
0.3 - 0.4 |
N |
N14 |
YMCA
of Hong Kong Christian College |
ESc-005 to ESc-008, ESc-010 |
E |
65 |
58 - 61 |
27 - 43 |
58 - 61 |
15.7 - 32.0 |
N |
N15 |
Caritas
Charles Vath College |
ESc-003 to ESc-004, ESc-009 |
E |
65 |
60 - 61 |
37 - 53 |
60 - 61 |
7.5 - 24.4 |
N |
N17[9][10] |
Possible
Public Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39 |
A39-001 to A39-006 |
R |
70 |
48 - 64 |
24 - 68 |
57 - 68 |
0.0 - 38.6 |
N |
Social Welfare Facilities at Tung
Chung Area 39 |
A39-SW-001 to A39-SW-004 |
R |
70 |
20 - 55 |
63 - 73 |
64 - 73 |
0.0 - 0.6 |
N |
|
Possible School Development near Tung
Chung Area 39 (with boarding blocks) |
PSc-003 to PSc-004 |
E |
65 |
50 - 59 |
31 - 51 |
50 - 59 |
6.7 - 27.9 |
N |
|
PSc-005 to PSc-006 |
R |
70 |
52 - 63 |
32 - 48 |
54 - 63 |
5.8 - 31.2 |
N |
||
N18 |
Temple
and Houses in Shek Pik Au |
ETe-012 |
W |
65 |
28 |
43 - 44 |
43 - 44 |
0.1 |
N |
SPA-001 |
V |
70 |
36 - 37 |
47 |
48 |
0.4 |
N |
||
N19 |
Scattered
Houses near Shek Pik Au |
SPA-002 |
V |
70 |
27 - 29 |
38 |
39 |
0.3 - 0.5 |
N |
N20 |
Scattered
Houses near Tung Chung Bay |
TCB-001 |
V |
70 |
20 - 23 |
25 - 26 |
27 - 28 |
1.1 - 1.6 |
N |
N28 |
Ho Yu College and Ho Yu Primary
School |
ESc-001 to ESc-002 |
E |
65 |
13 - 21 |
46 - 59 |
46 - 59 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N29 |
Caribbean Coast |
CAC-001 to CAC-002 |
R |
70 |
27 - 32 |
64 - 70 |
64 - 70 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N31 |
Lantau North (Extension) Country Park |
LNCP-001 to LNCP-006, LNCP-008 to LNCP-009 |
O |
N/A |
0 - 59 |
37 - 75 |
41 - 75 |
0.0 - 7.9 |
N/A |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP
– Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W – Places of Public
Worship, V– Village type development, O - Others
[5] Landuse
according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[6] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
[7] Existing
NSRs retained within TCW.
[8] According
to the latest information from the “Proposed Residential / Commercial
Development at TCTL 36, Tung Chung”, “Proposed Residential Development at Tung
Chung Area 55B, TCTL No. 37” and “Public Rental Housing Development at Area 56,
Tung Chung”.
[9] The
development layout and no. of storey have been based on the “Planning Brief for
Public Rental Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39”.
[10] PSc-005
to PSc-006 represent the boarding blocks of the planned school near Area 39.
[11] Not
Applicable.
Table 4.26d Predicted
road traffic noise impact at existing and committed NSRs under mitigated scenario
(Year 2045)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Noise Impact, L10
1hr dB(A) [6] |
Project Road
Contribution, dB(A) |
Mitigation Measures
Required [Y/N] |
||
Project Road |
Other Road |
Overall |
|||||||
N2-1[7] |
Ma Wan Chung |
MWC-001 to MWC-002 |
V |
70 |
55 - 58 |
54 - 58 |
57 - 61 |
3.0 - 3.8 |
N |
N2-2[7] |
Ngau
Au and Tung Hing |
NGA-001 |
V |
70 |
54 |
38 - 41 |
54 |
13.4 - 15.4 |
N |
N2-3[7] |
Lam
Che |
LAC-001 |
V |
70 |
61 |
16 - 17 |
61 |
43.9 - 45.4 |
N |
N2-4[7] |
Nim
Yuen |
NIY-001 |
V |
70 |
54 |
6 |
54 |
47.8 - 47.9 |
N |
N2-5[7] |
Mok
Ka |
MOK-001 to MOK-002 |
V |
70 |
52 |
25 - 45 |
52 - 53 |
7.8 - 27.2 |
N |
N2-6[7] |
Shek
Lau Po |
SLP-001 to SLP-004 |
V |
70 |
54 - 65 |
0 - 52 |
54 - 66 |
14.0 - 53.7 |
N |
N2-7[7] |
Shek
Mun Kap |
SMK-001 to SMK-002 |
V |
70 |
65 |
52 - 59 |
65 - 66 |
6.7 - 12.9 |
N |
N2-8[7] |
Temple |
ETe-005 to ETe-008 |
W |
65 |
51 - 62 |
49 - 55 |
55 - 62 |
2.5 - 10.0 |
N |
N2-9[7] |
Prajna
Dhyana Temple |
ETe-001 to ETe-004 |
W |
65 |
42 - 53 |
45 - 62 |
53 - 63 |
0.1 - 8.5 |
N |
N2-10[7] |
Hau Wong Temple |
ETe-009 to ETe-011 |
W |
65 |
52 - 60 |
36 - 49 |
54 - 60 |
4.7 - 21.2 |
N |
N3[8] |
Reclamation
Area next to Tung Chung East |
A54-001 to A54-002 |
R |
70 |
6 - 66 |
58 - 69 |
63 - 69 |
0.0 - 4.9 |
N |
A55a-001 to A55a-005 |
R |
70 |
16 - 51 |
50 - 65 |
50 - 65 |
0.0 - 1.3 |
N |
||
A55b-001 to A55b-003 |
R |
70 |
34 - 53 |
60 - 67 |
60 - 67 |
0.0 - 0.7 |
N |
||
A56-001 to A56-003 |
R |
70 |
59 - 67 |
49 - 70 |
60 - 71 |
0.3 - 14.5 |
N |
||
PSc-001 to PSc-002 |
E |
65 |
52 - 56 |
63 - 66 |
64 - 66 |
0.1 - 0.7 |
N |
||
N4 |
Tung
Chung Crescent |
TCC-001 |
R |
70 |
43 - 49 |
66 - 72 |
66 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N9 |
Yat
Tung Estate |
YTE-001 to YTE-004 |
R |
70 |
0 - 64 |
62 - 72 |
63 - 72 |
0.0 - 1.6 |
N |
N10 |
Sheung
Ling Pei |
SHP-001 |
V |
70 |
42 |
69 |
69 |
0.0 |
N |
N11 |
Ha Ling Pei |
HLP-001 |
V |
70 |
52 |
72 |
72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N12 |
Wong Ka Wai |
WKW-001 to WKW-002 |
V |
70 |
42 - 54 |
68 - 72 |
68 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N13 |
Lung Tseng Tau |
LTT-001 |
V |
70 |
59 |
67 |
68 |
0.7 |
N |
N14 |
YMCA
of Hong Kong Christian College |
ESc-005 to ESc-008, ESc-010 |
E |
65 |
64 - 65 |
35 - 49 |
64 - 65 |
14.9 - 29.2 |
N |
N15 |
Caritas
Charles Vath College |
ESc-003 to ESc-004, ESc-009 |
E |
65 |
63 - 65 |
38 - 54 |
64 - 65 |
9.4 - 26.8 |
N |
N17[9][10] |
Possible
Public Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39 |
A39-001 to A39-006 |
R |
70 |
51 - 70 |
24 - 68 |
63 - 70 |
0.1 - 43.7 |
N |
Social Welfare Facilities at Tung
Chung Area 39 |
A39-SW-001 to A39-SW-004 |
R |
70 |
32 - 59 |
64 - 72 |
64 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.4 |
N |
|
Possible School Development near Tung
Chung Area 39 (with boarding blocks) |
PSc-003 to PSc-004 |
E |
65 |
56 - 64 |
37 - 58 |
56 - 64 |
5.7 - 27.1 |
N |
|
PSc-005 to PSc-006 |
R |
70 |
58 - 69 |
38 - 48 |
58 - 69 |
10.6 - 30.3 |
N |
||
N18 |
Temple
and Houses in Shek Pik Au |
ETe-012 |
W |
65 |
38 |
53 - 54 |
53 - 54 |
0.1 |
N |
SPA-001 |
V |
70 |
42 |
60 |
60 |
0.1 |
N |
||
N19 |
Scattered
Houses near Shek Pik Au |
SPA-002 |
V |
70 |
33 - 34 |
51 |
51 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N20 |
Scattered
Houses near Tung Chung Bay |
TCB-001 |
V |
70 |
27 - 30 |
31 - 32 |
33 - 34 |
1.6 - 2.1 |
N |
N28 |
Ho Yu College and Ho Yu Primary
School |
ESc-001 to ESc-002 |
E |
65 |
12 - 21 |
48 - 61 |
48 - 61 |
0.0 |
N |
N29 |
Caribbean Coast |
CAC-001 to CAC-002 |
R |
70 |
27 - 32 |
65 - 72 |
65 - 72 |
0.0 - 0.1 |
N |
N31 |
Lantau North (Extension) Country Park |
LNCP-001 to LNCP-006, LNCP-008 to LNCP-009 |
O |
N/A |
0 - 62 |
42 - 77 |
42 - 77 |
0.0 - 7.9 |
N/A |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP
– Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, W – Places of Public
Worship, V– Village type development, O - Others
[5] Landuse
according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[6] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
[7] Existing
NSRs retained within TCW.
[8] According
to the latest information from the “Proposed Residential / Commercial
Development at TCTL 36, Tung Chung”, “Proposed Residential Development at Tung
Chung Area 55B, TCTL No. 37” and “Public Rental Housing Development at Area 56,
Tung Chung”.
[9] The
development layout and no. of storey have been based on the “Planning Brief for
Public Rental Housing Development at Tung Chung Area 39”.
[10] PSc-005
to PSc-006 represent the boarding blocks of the planned school near Area 39.
[11] Not
Applicable.
Table 4.27a Predicted road traffic noise impact at planned NSRs under mitigated
scenario (Year 2023)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Predicted Overall L10 1hr,
dB(A) [6] |
Mitigation Measures Required [Y/N] |
N1 |
B1-1 |
B1-1-01
to B1-1-14 |
R |
70 |
53 - 67 |
N |
B1-2 |
B1-2-01
to B1-2-59 |
R |
70 |
38 - 68 |
N |
|
N2 |
TCW-2 |
TCW-2-01
to TCW-2-03 |
R |
70 |
55 - 67 |
N |
TCW-3 |
TCW-3-01 |
R |
70 |
62 - 64 |
N |
|
TCV-6 |
TCV-6-01
to TCV-6-09 |
R |
70 |
60 - 70 |
N |
|
TCV-7 |
TCV-7-01
to TCV-7-03 |
R |
70 |
61 - 69 |
N |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP
– Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R –
Residential Premises.
[5] Landuse
according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[6] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
Table 4.27b Predicted road traffic noise impact at planned NSRs under mitigated
scenario (Year 2025)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Predicted Overall L10 1hr,
dB(A) [6] |
Mitigation Measures Required [Y/N] |
N1 |
B1-1 |
B1-1-01
to B1-1-14 |
R |
70 |
51 - 70 |
N |
B1-2 |
B1-2-01
to B1-2-59 |
R |
70 |
56 - 70 |
N |
|
D0-3 |
D0-3-01
to D0-3-05 |
E |
65 |
45 - 65 |
N |
|
D0-4 |
D0-4-01
to D0-4-05 |
E |
65 |
42 - 65 |
N |
|
D1-1 |
D1-1-01
to D1-1-05, D1-1-08 to D1-1-15 |
R |
70 |
65 - 70 |
N |
|
D1-2 |
D1-2-01,
D1-1-06 to D1-1-07, D1-1-16 to D1-1-21 |
R |
70 |
64 - 70 |
N |
|
D2-1 |
D2-1-01 |
R |
70 |
66 - 70 |
N |
|
D2-2 |
D2-2-02 |
R |
70 |
58 - 61 |
N |
|
D2-3 |
D2-3-01
to D2-3-09 |
R |
70 |
62 - 70 |
N |
|
D2-4 |
D2-4-01
to D2-4-26 |
R |
70 |
60 - 70 |
N |
|
N2 |
TCW-2 |
TCW-2-01
to TCW-2-03 |
R |
70 |
55 - 67 |
N |
TCW-3 |
TCW-3-01 |
R |
70 |
63 - 64 |
N |
|
TCV-6 |
TCV-6-01
to TCV-6-09 |
R |
70 |
60 - 70 |
N |
|
TCV-7 |
TCV-7-01
to TCV-7-03 |
R |
70 |
62 - 69 |
N |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP
– Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions.
[5] Landuse
according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[6] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
Table 4.27c Predicted road traffic noise impact at planned NSRs under mitigated
scenario (Year 2027)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Predicted Overall L10 1hr,
dB(A) [6] |
Mitigation Measures Required [Y/N] |
N1 |
A1-1 |
A1-1-01a
to A1-1-18 |
R |
70 |
41 - 70 |
N |
A1-2 |
A1-2-01
to A1-2-18 |
R |
70 |
36 - 70 |
N |
|
A2-1 |
A2-1-01
to A2-1-28 |
R |
70 |
35 - 70 |
N |
|
A2-2 |
A2-2-01
to A2-2-04, A2-2-06 to A2-2-09 |
R |
70 |
35 - 55 |
N |
|
A2-3 |
A2-3-01
to A2-3-08 |
R |
70 |
35 – 50 |
N |
|
A2-4 |
A2-4-01
to A2-4-37 |
R |
70 |
27 - 58 |
N |
|
B1-1 |
B1-1-01
to B1-1-14 |
R |
70 |
56 - 70 |
N |
|
B1-2 |
B1-2-01
to B1-2-59 |
R |
70 |
55 - 70 |
N |
|
D0-3 |
D0-3-01
to D0-3-05 |
E |
65 |
41 – 61 |
N |
|
D0-4 |
D0-4-01
to D0-4-05 |
E |
65 |
37 - 60 |
N |
|
D1-1 |
D1-1-01
to D1-1-05, D1-1-08 to D1-1-15 |
R |
70 |
60 - 69 |
N |
|
D1-2 |
D1-2-01,
D1-1-06 to D1-1-07, D1-1-16 to D1-1-21 |
R |
70 |
61 - 67 |
N |
|
D2-1 |
D2-1-01 |
R |
70 |
65 - 69 |
N |
|
D2-2 |
D2-2-02 |
R |
70 |
64 - 67 |
N |
|
D2-3 |
D2-3-01
to D2-3-09 |
R |
70 |
62 - 70 |
N |
|
D2-4 |
D2-4-01
to D2-4-26 |
R |
70 |
59 - 70 |
N |
|
N2 |
TCW-2 |
TCW-2-01
to TCW-2-03 |
R |
70 |
56 - 67 |
N |
TCW-3 |
TCW-3-01 |
R |
70 |
63 - 65 |
N |
|
TCV-6 |
TCV-6-01
to TCV-6-09 |
R |
70 |
59 - 70 |
N |
|
TCV-7 |
TCV-7-01
to TCV-7-03 |
R |
70 |
62 - 69 |
N |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP
– Noise assessment point
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions
[5] Landuse
according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[6] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
Table 4.27d Predicted road traffic noise impact at planned NSRs under mitigated
scenario (Year 2045)
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criterion, L10 1hr dB(A) |
Predicted Overall L10 1hr,
dB(A) [6] |
Mitigation Measures Required [Y/N] |
N1 |
A1-1 |
A1-1-01a
to A1-1-18 |
R |
70 |
43 - 70 |
N |
A1-2 |
A1-2-01
to A1-2-18 |
R |
70 |
44 - 70 |
N |
|
A2-1 |
A2-1-01
to A2-1-28 |
R |
70 |
55 - 70 |
N |
|
A2-2 |
A2-2-01
to A2-2-04, A2-2-06 to A2-2-09 |
R |
70 |
60 - 70 |
N |
|
A2-3 |
A2-3-01
to A2-3-08 |
R |
70 |
61 - 70 |
N |
|
A2-4 |
A2-4-01
to A2-4-37 |
R |
70 |
55 - 70 |
N |
|
B1-1 |
B1-1-01
to B1-1-14 |
R |
70 |
54 - 69 |
N |
|
B1-2 |
B1-2-01
to B1-2-59 |
R |
70 |
55 - 70 |
N |
|
C0-2 |
C0-2-01
to C0-2-02 |
R |
70 |
56 - 61 |
N |
|
C1-1 |
C1-1-01
to C1-1-57 |
R |
70 |
57 - 70 |
N |
|
C2-1 |
C2-1-01
to C2-1-13, C2-2-26 to C2-2-31 |
R |
70 |
59 - 70 |
N |
|
C2-2 |
C2-2-01
to C2-2-03, C2-2-14 to C2-2-25 |
R |
70 |
52 - 70 |
N |
|
D0-3 |
D0-3-01
to D0-3-05 |
E |
65 |
42 - 63 |
N |
|
D0-4 |
D0-4-01
to D0-4-05 |
E |
65 |
39 - 62 |
N |
|
D1-1 |
D1-1-01
to D1-1-05, D1-1-08 to D1-1-15 |
R |
70 |
62 - 70 |
N |
|
D1-2 |
D1-2-01,
D1-1-06 to D1-1-07, D1-1-16 to D1-1-21 |
R |
70 |
62 - 69 |
N |
|
D2-1 |
D2-1-01 |
R |
70 |
65 - 70 |
N |
|
D2-2 |
D2-2-02 |
R |
70 |
66 - 68 |
N |
|
D2-3 |
D2-3-01
to D2-3-09 |
R |
70 |
62 - 70 |
N |
|
D2-4 |
D2-4-01
to D2-4-26 |
R |
70 |
60 - 70 |
N |
|
E0-1 |
E0-1-01
to E0-1-05 |
E |
65 |
59 - 65 |
N |
|
E0-2 |
E0-2-01
to E0-2-02 |
E |
65 |
59 - 64 |
N |
|
E0-3 |
E0-3-01
to E0-3-04 |
E |
65 |
61 - 65 |
N |
|
E1-1 |
E1-1-01
to E1-1-02 |
R |
70 |
64 - 69 |
N |
|
E1-4 |
E1-4-01
to E1-4-10 |
R |
70 |
58 - 70 |
N |
|
E1-5 |
E1-5-01
to E1-5-07 |
R |
70 |
62 - 70 |
N |
|
E3-1 |
E3-1-01,
E3-1-03 to E3-1-07 |
R |
70 |
59 - 67 |
N |
|
F0-2 |
F0-2-01
to F0-2-02 |
E |
65 |
58 - 63 |
N |
|
F0-3 |
F0-3-01
to F0-3-05 |
E |
65 |
60 - 64 |
N |
|
F0-4 |
F0-4-01,
F0-4-03 |
E |
65 |
60 - 62 |
N |
|
F1-1 |
F1-1-01
to F1-1-02, F1-1-04 |
R |
70 |
66 - 69 |
N |
|
F1-2 |
F1-2-01
to F1-2-04 |
R |
70 |
61 - 68 |
N |
|
F2-1 |
F2-1-01
to F2-1-02 |
R |
70 |
65 - 70 |
N |
|
F2-2 |
F2-2-01
to F2-2-02 |
R |
70 |
49 - 68 |
N |
|
N2 |
TCW-1 |
TCW-1-01
to TCW-1-03 |
R |
70 |
45 - 63 |
N |
TCW-2 |
TCW-2-01
to TCW-2-03 |
R |
70 |
56 - 68 |
N |
|
TCW-3 |
TCW-3-01 |
R |
70 |
63 - 65 |
N |
|
TCV-1 |
TCV-1-01
to TCV-1-05, TCV-1-07 to TCV-1-19 |
R |
70 |
65 - 70 |
N |
|
TCV-2 |
TCV-2-01
to TCV-2-05 |
R |
70 |
62 - 70 |
N |
|
TCV-3 |
TCV-3-01 |
R |
70 |
62 - 63 |
N |
|
TCV-4 |
TCV-4-01
to TCV-4-02 |
R |
70 |
55 - 61 |
N |
|
TCV-5a |
TCV-5a-01
to TCV-5a-04 |
R |
70 |
57 - 66 |
N |
|
TCV-5b |
TCV-5b-01 |
R |
70 |
61 - 62 |
N |
|
TCV-6 |
TCV-6-01
to TCV-6-09 |
R |
70 |
62 - 70 |
N |
|
TCV-7 |
TCV-7-01
to TCV-7-03 |
R |
70 |
62 - 70 |
N |
|
TCV-8 |
TCV-8-01 |
R |
70 |
63 |
N |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP
– Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions.
[5] Landuse
according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[6] Bolded
values mean exceedance of the relevant noise criteria.
4.5.4.4
As
discussed in Section 4.4, the total
number of dwellings, classrooms and other noise sensitive receivers that will
be exposed to noise impact exceeding the criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM has
been calculated. It is predicted that a total of about 40 classrooms at Year
2023, about 130 dwellings and 70 classrooms at Year 2025, about 270 dwellings
and 2 classrooms at Year 2027 and about 1050 dwellings and 160 classrooms at
Year 2045 will expose to noise impact.
4.5.4.5
With
the implementation of mitigation measures, the total number of dwellings,
classrooms and other noise sensitive receivers that will be benefitted and
protected has been calculated. It is predicted that a total of about 40
classrooms is protected and about 40 classrooms benefited at Year 2023, about
130 dwellings and 70 classrooms is protected and 130 dwellings and 70
classrooms is benefited at Year 2025, about 270 dwellings and 2 classrooms is
protected and 270 dwellings and 2 classrooms is benefited at Year 2027, and
about 1050 dwellings and 160 classrooms is protected and 1050 dwellings and 160
classrooms is benefited at Year 2045.
4.5.4.6
The environmental
requirements / constraints on representative site layouts for road traffic
noise assessment have been confirmed with and made know to Planning Department,
Housing Department and Lands Department.
Indirect Mitigation Measures
4.5.4.7 Review of the further mitigation measures have been conducted in consideration of the constraints and project nature. It is considered that all practicable direct mitigation measures, including 1) noise barriers along some road sections or boundary walls within development sites; 2) application of low noise road surfacing materials on some road sections; and 3) suitable treatment on end walls, arranging noise tolerant portions of buildings in internal layout design, and architectural fins in some buildings have been exhausted and no adverse residual impact is anticipated.
4.5.4.8 According to Section 4.8 of EIAO Guidance Note No. 12/2010, the testing criteria for consideration of Indirect Mitigation Measures are set out as below:
(i)
the
predicted overall noise level from the road project together with other traffic
noise in the vicinity must be above a specified noise level (e.g. 70 dB(A) for
domestic premises and 65 dB(A) for education institutions, all in L10(1hr));
(ii)
the
predicted overall noise level is at least 1.0 dB(A) more than the prevailing
traffic noise level, i.e. the total traffic noise level existing before the
works to construct the road were commenced; and
(iii)
the
contribution to the increase in the predicted overall noise level from the road
project must be at least 1.0 dB(A).
4.5.4.9 Appendix 4.14 summarises the mitigated results against the above testing criteria. As all representative NSRs do not fall within the above 3 testing criteria, indirect mitigation measure is therefore not required under this Project. The total number of existing dwellings, classrooms and other sensitive elements which may qualify for indirect mitigation measures is nil.
4.5.5
Evaluation of Residual Road Traffic Noise Impact
4.5.5.1
According to Section 4.5.4, adverse residual road traffic noise impact is not
anticipated.
4.6
Fixed Noise Sources Impact Assessment
4.6.1
Fixed Noise Sources Impact Assessment Methodology
4.6.1.1
Fixed noise assessment will be conducted
based on the following procedures:
·
Determine the assessment area;
·
Identify and locate representative NSRs
that may be affected by the noise sources;
·
Determine the noise criteria for both
daytime and nighttime;
·
Use standard acoustic principle for
attenuation and directivity; and
·
Adopt correction of tonality,
impulsiveness and intermittency as stipulated in TM-places;
·
Calculate the noise impacts using assumed
plant inventories and utilisation schedule, if available;
·
Cumulative impacts will be included.
4.6.2
Identification of Fixed Noise Sources
Impact
Identification of
Assessment Area and Noise Sensitive Receivers
4.6.2.1 Except for fixed noise sources from HKIA, the assessment area should be: i) 300m assessment area for planned NSRs affected by planned and existing fixed noise sources; ii) 300m assessment area for planned fixed noise sources. The assessment area for fixed noise impact assessment is shown in Figure 4.8. In addition, as discussed in Section 4.2.2, cumulative fixed noise impacts from the operation of three runway system will be addressed in this report.
4.6.2.2
For operational fixed noise assessment,
representative NSRs locations have been selected from Table 4.12 and are summarized in the table below. Photos of
existing NSRs are given in Appendix 4.1.
Table
4.28 Representative NSRs for fixed noise assessment
No. |
Uses[1] |
No. of Storey |
NAP[2] |
Planned NSRs – TCE |
|||
N1 |
R |
50 |
A1-1-05g |
R |
50 |
A1-2-10c |
|
R |
18 |
D1-1-01 |
|
R |
37 |
C2-1-06 |
|
R |
36 |
C2-2-03 |
|
R |
36 |
C2-2-04 |
|
R |
13 |
F1-2-03 |
|
R |
10 |
F2-1-02 |
|
Planned NSRs – TCW |
|||
N2 |
R |
4 |
TCV-8-01 |
R |
4 |
TCV-2-01 |
|
R |
4 |
TCV-2-02 |
|
R |
4 |
TCV-3-01 |
|
R |
4 |
TCV-4-02 |
|
R |
4 |
TCV-5a-01 |
|
R |
4 |
TCV-1-01 |
|
R |
4 |
TCV-1-04 |
|
R |
4 |
TCV-1-06 |
|
R |
18 |
TCW-1-04 |
|
Existing NSRs |
|||
N2-6 |
V |
3 |
SLP-003 |
N9 |
R |
41 |
YTE-005 |
N31 |
O |
N/A |
LNCP-001 |
O |
N/A |
LNCP-003 |
|
O |
N/A |
LNCP-004 |
|
O |
N/A |
LNCP-005 |
|
O |
N/A |
LNCP-009 |
|
Committed NSRs |
|||
N3 |
R |
26 |
A55a-001 |
R |
42 |
A56-002 |
|
R |
42 |
A56-003 |
|
E |
9 |
PSc-001 |
Notes:
[1] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions, V – Village type
development, O – Others.
[2] NAP
– Noise Assessment Points.
4.6.2.3
The representative site
layouts for fixed noise source assessment have been confirmed with Planning
Department and Lands Department.
4.6.2.4
Prevailing noise measurements have been
conducted for determination of the assessment criteria as shown in Table 4.28a below:
Table 4.28a Noise criteria for fixed noise assessment
NAP[1] |
Time Period |
ASR[4] |
ANL-5, dB(A) [A] |
BNL, dB(A) [B] |
Reference NM[2] |
Criteria,
dB(A) Min. of [A] & [B] |
Planned Salt Water Pumping Station/ Pumping
Station at D0-1 |
||||||
D1-1-01 |
Day & Evening |
B |
60 |
55 |
PNM-2 |
55 |
Night |
50 |
53 |
50 |
|||
Planned Salt Water Pumping Station/ Pumping
Station at C0-3 |
||||||
C2-1-06 |
Day & Evening |
B |
60 |
55 |
PNM-2 |
55 |
Night |
50 |
53 |
50 |
|||
Planned Salt Water Pumping Station/ Pumping
Station at B0-4 |
||||||
A55a-001 |
Day & Evening |
B |
60 |
55 |
PNM-2 |
55 |
Night |
50 |
53 |
50 |
|||
Planned Salt Water Pumping Station/ Pumping
Station at TCV-a |
||||||
TCV-3-01 |
Day &
Evening |
B |
60 |
50 |
PNM-7 |
50 |
Night |
50 |
45 |
45 |
|||
Planned Salt Water Pumping Station/ Pumping
Station at TCV-c |
||||||
SLP-003 |
Day &
Evening |
B |
60 |
50 |
PNM-7 |
50 |
Night |
50 |
45 |
45 |
|||
Planned Salt Water Pumping Station/ Pumping
Station at TCV-e |
||||||
TCV-1-06 |
Day &
Evening |
B |
60 |
50 |
PNM-7 |
50 |
Night |
50 |
45 |
45 |
|||
Planned Salt Water Pumping Station/ Pumping
Station at TCV-f |
||||||
TCV-8-01 |
Day & Evening |
B |
60 |
50 |
PNM-7 |
50 |
Night |
50 |
45 |
45 |
|||
Planned Salt Water Pumping Station/ Pumping
Station at TCV-d |
||||||
TCV-2-02 |
Day & Evening |
B |
60 |
50 |
PNM-7 |
50 |
Night |
50 |
45 |
45 |
|||
Planned Salt Water Pumping Station/ Pumping
Station at TCV-b |
||||||
TCV-4-02 |
Day & Evening |
B |
60 |
50 |
PNM-7 |
50 |
Night |
50 |
45 |
45 |
|||
Planned Chung Mun Road Sewage Pumping Station |
||||||
TCV-1-04 |
Day & Evening |
B |
60 |
50 |
PNM-7 |
50 |
Night |
50 |
45 |
45 |
|||
Planned Fire Station at G0-3 |
||||||
C2-1-06 |
Day & Evening |
B |
60 |
55 |
PNM-2 |
55 |
Night |
50 |
53 |
50 |
|||
Electric Substation at B0-2 |
||||||
A56-002 |
Day & Evening |
B |
60 |
55 |
PNM-2 |
55 |
Night |
50 |
53 |
50 |
|||
A56-003 |
Day & Evening |
B |
60 |
55 |
PNM-2 |
55 |
Night |
50 |
53 |
50 |
|||
Public Transport Interchange at B1-1 |
||||||
A56-002 |
Day & Evening |
B |
60 |
55 |
PNM-2 |
55 |
Night |
50 |
53 |
50 |
|||
Public Transport Interchange at A1-2 |
||||||
A1-2-10c |
Day & Evening |
C |
65 |
55 |
PNM-2 |
55 |
Night |
55 |
53 |
53 |
|||
Public Transport Interchange at C2-2 |
||||||
C2-2-04 |
Day & Evening |
B |
60 |
55 |
PNM-2 |
55 |
Night |
50 |
53 |
50 |
|||
Public Transport Interchange at COM-3 |
||||||
YTE-005 |
Day & Evening |
B |
60 |
50 |
PNM-7 |
50 |
Night |
50 |
45 |
45 |
|||
Boatyard and Maintenance Area at F0-5[3] |
||||||
F2-1-02 |
Day & Evening[4] |
B |
60 |
55 |
PNM-2 |
55 |
Planned Sports Ground at G0-1[3] |
||||||
F1-2-03 |
Day & Evening[4] |
B |
60 |
55 |
PNM-2 |
55 |
C2-2-03 |
Day & Evening[4] |
B |
60 |
55 |
PNM-2 |
55 |
Note:
[1] NAP
– Noise Assessment Points.
[2] NM
– Noise measurement location.
[3] Sports Ground and Boat Maintenance Area operates during
daytime and evening time only.
[4] Details
on the determination of Area Sensitivity Rating are shown in Appendix 4.1a.
Inventory of Noise Sources
4.6.2.5
Key existing and planned noise sources have been
discussed in Section 4.2.2 and a
summary of the fixed noise source affecting the project area given below and
illustrated in Figure 4.1. The inventory of noise source has
been confirmed with the project
proponent.
Existing Fixed Noise Sources
·
North Lantau Hospital;
·
Existing Sewage Pumping Station in TCW;
Planned Fixed Noise Sources
·
Salt Water Pumping Station / Sewage
Pumping Station / Pumping Station;
·
Electric Substation;
·
PTIs;
·
Chung Mun Road Sewage Pumping Station;
·
Marina – Boat Maintenance Area (by
others);
·
Sports Ground (by others);
·
Ventilation Building for HKLR (by others);
·
Planned Third Runway of HKIA (by others); and
·
Railway Stations at TCE and TCW and its
associated railway system (by others).
4.6.3
Prediction and Evaluation of Fixed Noise
Sources Impact
Scenarios
4.6.3.1
The fixed noise impact assessment of
unmitigated scenario and mitigated scenario of worst operation mode
representing the maximum noise emission is
conducted with respect to the criteria set in Annex 5 of the TM. The worst operation mode with 100%
operation will be predicted based on backward calculation of separation
distance. Hence, the maximum Sound Power Level will be predicted regardless on
the percentage usage. Validity of the operation modes have been confirmed with the project proponent.
Prediction of Noise Impact
North Lantau Hospital
4.6.3.2
North Lantau Hospital is located at 1500m
west of TCE. Hence, it would not affect the NSRs in TCE. The nearest NSR TCW-2
(Figure 4.1b) in TCW is
located at some 100m and the distance attenuation is about 49dB(A) according to
standard point source correction. In addition, prevailing noise measurements
have been conducted at PNM-10 (i.e. at the top of the Rocky Lion Hill at the
north of the North Lantau Hospital, as described in Table 4.11 and location as illustrated in Figure 4.4)
which is located at a shorter separation distance from the hospital than TCW-2.
The North Lantau Hospital was in operation during the prevailing noise
measurements and the outdoor noise sources included air-cooled chillers,
cooling tower, ventilation louvers, etc.
4.6.3.3
According to the measured prevailing noise
measurements, the noise levels at PNM-10 are 55dB(A), 54dB(A) and 51dB(A)
during daytime, evening time and night-time periods respectively, and have
included the effects of all the noise sources in the vicinity such as road
traffic noise, community noise, aircraft noise, fixed noise impacts from the
operation of the hospital and HKIA. Since the total noise from all these
various sources are within the criteria, adverse fixed noise impacts from the
hospital alone on TCW is not anticipated.
Existing Sewage Pumping Station in
TCW
4.6.3.4
According to the measured prevailing noise
measurements, the noise levels at PNM-6 are 54B(A), 52dB(A) and 48dB(A) during
daytime, evening time and night-time periods respectively, and have included
the effects of all the noise sources in the vicinity such as road traffic
noise, community noise, aircraft noise, fixed noise impacts from the operation
of the hospital and HKIA. Since the total noise from all these various sources
are so close to the criteria, adverse fixed noise impacts from the existing
sewage pumping station in TCW is not anticipated.
Planned Salt Water Pumping Station
/ Sewage Pumping Station / Pumping Station
4.6.3.5
The major noise sources of the planned SWPS/SPS/PSs
are from the operation of pumps, mechanically racked screens, transformer and
ventilation fan of deodorization unit. The separation distances for the NSRs
nearest to the planned SWPS/SPS/PSs are listed below:
·
SWPS/SPS (D0-1): Nearest NSR (planned) (D1-1) at 20m;
·
SWPS/SPS (C0-3): Nearest NSR (planned) (C0-3) at 20m;
·
SWPS/SPS (B0-4): Nearest NSR (planned) (N3) at 10m;
·
SWPS/SPS (TCV-f): Nearest NSR (planned) (TCV-8) at 5m;
·
SWPS/SPS (TCV-d): Nearest NSR (planned) (TCV-2) at 20m;
·
SWPS/SPS (TCV-b): Nearest NSR (planned) (TCV-4) at 10m;
·
PS (TCV-a): Near NSR (planned) (TCV-3) at 15m;
·
PS (TCV-c): Near NSR (planned) (SLP-003) at 20m; and
·
PS (TCV-e): Near NSR (planned) (TCV-1) at 10m.
4.6.3.6
Since there is no design information on
the proposed SWPS/SPS/PS, analysis has been conducted to determine the maximum
allowable SWL based on the respective separation distances.
4.6.3.7
Parts of the TCE and TCW are encroached
into the assessment area of the fixed noise impact induced from the operation
of 3RS of 1300m and 2800m during day & evening and night time respectively.
Hence, cumulative impacts have been included. The table below shows the maximum
allowable SWL. Detailed calculation is shown in Appendix 4.15.
Table
4.29 Summary of maximum allowable SWL for the planned
SWPS/SPS/PS
Plant Item |
Maximum Allowable SWL[1], dB(A) |
Salt Water Pumping Station / Sewage Pumping Station (TCE D0-1) |
84 |
Salt Water Pumping Station / Sewage Pumping Station (TCE C0-3) |
88 |
Salt Water Pumping Station / Sewage Pumping Station (TCE B0-4) |
84 |
Salt Water Pumping Station / Sewage Pumping Station (TCW TCV-f) |
75 |
Salt Water Pumping Station / Sewage Pumping Station (TCW TCV-d) |
78 |
Salt Water Pumping Station / Sewage Pumping Station (TCW TCV-b) |
71 |
Pumping Station (TCW TCV-a) |
71 |
Pumping Station (TCW TCV-c) |
73 |
Pumping Station (TCW TCV-e) |
67 |
Note:
[1] Cumulative impacts from the operation of system of 3RS is
included.
4.6.3.8
A 3dB(A) facade correction and 3dB(A)
tonality correction have been applied in noise analysis. Typically, a noise
reduction of 10dB(A) and 20dB(A) is possible with the application of silencer
installation and special acoustic enclosure at various units. These predicted
maximum allowable SWL are in similar range as those predicted in other EIA
report (e.g. Approved EIA report for North East New Territories New Development
Areas (AEIAR-175/2013)).
4.6.3.9
The Contractor shall install acoustic
silencers, noise barrier or acoustic enclosure as appropriate to ensure the
specified maximum SWLs as shown in Table
4.29 will not be exceeded. The future design and selection of the equipment
shall also aim to reduce the effect of tonality, impulsiveness and
intermittency characteristics at the NSRs as much as practicable. However, the
Contractor shall also take into account the latest available information at
time of detail design to review and update the maximum allowable SWL as
appropriate.
Fire Station
4.6.3.10
The major fixed noise sources of fire
station include condenser, transformer, etc. As
discussed in Section 4.2.2, the nearest NSRs with receivers facing the fire station
would be the planned residential premises (C2-1)
located at TCE (Figure 4.1a) which is approximately 150m
away from the station. Since
there is no design information on the proposed fire station, analysis has been
conducted to determine the maximum allowable SWL based on the separation
distance. Cumulative impacts from HKIA have been included. The NSR is also
potentially affected by nearby sewage pumping station (C0-3) and the public
transport interchange (C2-2). Hence, cumulative impacts have been included. The table below shows the maximum
allowable SWL. Detailed calculation is shown in Appendix 4.15.
Table 4.30a Summary of maximum allowable SWL for fire
station
Plant Item |
Maximum
Allowable SWL[1], dB(A) |
Fire Station |
97 |
Note:
[1] Cumulative impacts from the operation of system of 3RS, public
transport interchange and sewage pumping station are included.
4.6.3.11
The Contractor shall install acoustic
silencers, noise barrier or acoustic enclosure as appropriate to ensure the
specified maximum SWLs as shown in Table
4.30a will not be exceeded. The future design and selection of the
equipment shall also aim to reduce the effect of tonality at the NSRs as much
as practicable. However, the Contractor shall also take into account the latest
available information at time of detail design to review and update the maximum
allowable SWL as appropriate.
Chung Mun Road Sewage Pumping
Station
4.6.3.12
Similar to the planned SWPS/SPS/PS above,
the major noise sources of Chung Mun Road Sewage Pumping Station are from the
operation of pumps, mechanically racked screens, transformer and ventilation
fan of deodorization unit.
4.6.3.13
The nearest NSR from the SPS is the
planned NSR TCW TCV-1 are located at about 40m. Since there is no design
information on the proposed SPS, analysis has been conducted to determine the
maximum allowable SWL based on the separation distance. Parts of the TCE and
TCW are encroached into the assessment area of the fixed noise impact induced
from the operation of planned 3RS of 1300m and 2800m during day & evening
and night time respectively. Hence, cumulative impacts have been included. Also,
NSR TCV-1 at TCW is potentially affected by the ventilation building and
associated facilities of the planned TCW Railway Station. Hence, cumulative
impacts have been included. The
table below shows the maximum allowable SWL. Detailed calculation is shown in Appendix 4.15.
Table 4.30b Summary of maximum allowable SWL for SPS
Plant Item |
Maximum
Allowable SWL[1], dB(A) |
Chung Mun Road Sewage Pumping Station |
81 |
Note:
[1] Cumulative
impacts from the operation of system of 3RS and the planned TCW Railway Station
are included.
4.6.3.14
These predicted maximum allowable SWL are
in similar range as those predicted in other EIA report (e.g. Approved EIA
report for North East New Territories New Development Areas (AEIAR-175/2013)).
4.6.3.15
The Contractor shall install acoustic
silencers, noise barrier or acoustic enclosure as appropriate to ensure the
specified maximum SWLs as shown in Table
4.30b will not be exceeded. The future design and selection of the
equipment shall also aim to reduce the effect of tonality at the NSRs as much
as practicable. However, the Contractor shall also take into account the latest
available information at time of detail design to review and update the maximum
allowable SWL as appropriate.
Electric Substation
4.6.3.16
The major noise sources of electric substation
are from the operation of transformers and ventilation systems.
4.6.3.17
The nearest NSR Reclamation Area next to
Tung Chung East (A56-002), is located at about 150m from the electric
substation. Since there is no design information on the proposed electric
substation, analysis has been conducted to determine the maximum allowable SWL
based on the separation distance. Cumulative impacts from HKIA have been
included. Also, NSR Reclamation Area next to Tung Chung East (A56-002) is
potentially affected by the public transport interchange (B1-1) and sewage
pumping station (B0-4). Hence, cumulative impacts have been included. The table below shows the maximum
allowable SWL. Detailed calculation is shown in Appendix 4.15.
Table
4.30c Summary of maximum allowable SWL for electric
substation
Plant Item |
Maximum
Allowable SWL[1], dB(A) |
Electric Substation |
96 |
Note:
[1] Cumulative
impacts from the operation of system of 3RS, public transport interchange and
sewage pumping station are included.
4.6.3.18
These predicted maximum allowable SWL are
in similar range as those predicted in other EIA report (e.g. Approved EIA
report for Kai Tak Development (AEIAR-130/2009)).
4.6.3.19
The Contractor shall install acoustic
silencers, noise barrier or acoustic enclosure as appropriate to ensure the
specified maximum SWLs as shown in Table
4.30c will not be exceeded. The future design and selection of the
equipment shall also aim to reduce the effect of tonality at the NSRs as much
as practicable. However, the Contractor shall also take into account the latest
available information at time of detail design to review and update the maximum
allowable SWL as appropriate.
PTIs
4.6.3.20
The PTIs would be decked under proposed
building structures and designed with no line-of-sight at the noise sensitive
use. The major fixed noise sources of PTIs include the operation of ventilation
fans.
4.6.3.21
Since there is no design information on
the proposed PTIs, analysis has been conducted to determine the maximum
allowable SWL based on the separation distance to the nearest NSRs. Cumulative
impacts from HKIA and other potential fixed noise sources have also been
included in the cumulative assessment. The table below shows the maximum
allowable SWL. Detailed calculation is shown in Appendix 4.15.
Table
4.30d Summary of maximum allowable SWL for PTIs
Plant Item |
Maximum Allowable SWL[1], dB(A) |
PTI (TCE B1-1) |
90 |
PTI (TCE A1-2) |
91 |
PTI (TCE C2-2) |
82 |
PTI (TCW COM-3) |
86 |
Note:
[1] Cumulative
impacts from the operation of system of 3RS, public transport interchange and sewage
pumping station are included.
4.6.3.22
These predicted maximum allowable SWL are
in similar range as those predicted in other EIA report (e.g. Approved EIA
report for Kai Tak Development (AEIAR-130/2009)).
4.6.3.23
The Contractor shall install acoustic louvres,
noise barrier or acoustic enclosure as appropriate to ensure the specified
maximum SWLs as shown in Table 4.30d
will not be exceeded. The future design and selection of the equipment shall
also aim to reduce the effect of tonality at the NSRs as much as practicable.
However, the Contractor shall also take into account the latest available
information at time of detail design to review and update the maximum allowable
SWL as appropriate.
Boatyard Maintenance Area (by others)
4.6.3.24
The major fixed noise sources of Boatyard
Maintenance Area (F0-5) include the ventilation systems.
4.6.3.25
Since there is no design
information on the proposed Boat Maintenance Area (F0-5), analysis has been
conducted to determine the maximum allowable SWL based on the separation
distance to the nearest NSR TCE (F2-1-02), which is about 200m from the noise
source. Cumulative impacts from HKIA have also been included in the cumulative
assessment. The table below shows the maximum allowable SWL. Detailed
calculation is shown in Appendix 4.15.
Table
4.30e Summary of maximum allowable SWL for
boatyard maintenance area
Plant Item |
Maximum
Allowable SWL[1], dB(A) |
Boatyard Maintenance Area |
103 |
Note:
[1] Cumulative
impacts from the operation of system of 3RS, public transport interchange and
sewage pumping station are included.
4.6.3.26
These predicted maximum allowable SWL are
in similar range as those predicted in other report (e.g. Noise Impact
Assessment: Proposed New Office, Workshop and Yard Facility, Plot 4C The Core,
Aberdeen, 2015).
4.6.3.27
The Contractor shall install acoustic
louvres, noise barrier or acoustic enclosure as appropriate to ensure the
specified maximum SWLs as shown in Table
4.30e will not be exceeded. The future design and selection of the
equipment shall also aim to reduce the effect of tonality at the NSRs as much
as practicable. However, the Contractor shall also take into account the latest
available information at time of detail design to review and update the maximum
allowable SWL as appropriate.
4.6.3.28
As the proposed Boatyard
Maintenance Area is considered as a Designated Project under Item O.2 of
Schedule 2 of TM-EIAO, a separate EIA study would be conducted by the future
operator to fulfil all the statutory requirements and procedures under the
EIAO.
Sports Ground (by others)
4.6.3.29
The landuse of TCE G0-1 is reserved for
the development of Sports Ground. The assessment has made reference to the
measurement data in the approved EIA report for Main Arena of the 2008 Olympic
Equestrian Event (AEIAR-097/2006). Noise survey of operation facility and PA system
were carried out at the grandstand and adjacent areas during a horse racing
day. The measured noise levels for the operation of the facility and PA are
about 73 dB(A) at 1.2m above floor level.
4.6.3.30
Noise from operation of the facility and
PA noise assessment have then been conducted in accordance with the following
procedures:
·
Establish the
noise from operation of the facility and PA noise level from previous relevant
noise measurement data measured by the approved EIA report for Main Arena of
the 2008 Olympic Equestrian Event:
·
Determine in
accordance with standard acoustic principle and practices the representative
SWL;
·
Determine the
separation distance at the NSRs from the noise source;
·
Apply corrections
for façade, distance, barrier attenuation and acoustic reflection where
applicable;
·
Quantify the level
of impact at the NSRs in accordance with TM-Places; and
·
Predict the
cumulative noise impacts of other noise sources on the NSRs where applicable.
4.6.3.31
Based on the assessment, adverse noise
impacts of noise from operation of the facility and PA system noise from Sports
Ground (TCE G0-1) are not anticipated. The predicted noise levels at the
nearest NSRs from the sports activity at the Sports Ground are presented in Table 4.31. Detailed calculation is shown in Appendix 4.16.
Table 4.31 Predicted sound
pressure level at NSRs
No.[1] |
NAP[2] |
ASR |
Shortest
Distance from the Source (m) |
Predicted
Sound Pressure Level, dB(A) |
Daytime
Criterion, dB(A)[1] |
Compliance |
N1 |
F1-2-03 |
B |
90 |
54 |
55 |
Y |
C2-2-03 |
B |
110 |
53 |
55 |
Y |
Note:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened windows
for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise Assessment Point.
[3] Activity conducted during daytime only. Relevant environmental
standards/ criteria: TM-EIAO noise standards for fixed noise.
[4] Details
on the determination of Area Sensitivity Rating are shown in Appendix 4.1a.
4.6.3.32
The predicted impacts of noise from
operation of the facility and PA system noise will be within the noise criteria
for the planned NSRs (TCE F1-2-03 and TCE C2-2-03).
4.6.3.33
In addition, it is also recommended to
incorporate the following measures for the PA system and/or the sound
amplification system, if used during the outdoor noise activities:
·
To use a cluster of small power loudspeakers instead of a few large
power loudspeakers;
·
To use directional loudspeakers and orientate them to point towards the
audience and away from the nearby NSRs; and
·
To include a “Limiter” device in the system to set the upper bound of
the output sound level.
4.6.3.34
With proper event management, the noise
generated from the outdoor activities would be under control and adverse noise
impact on the nearby NSRs would be minimised.
4.6.3.35
As the proposed sports ground is considered as a
Designated Project under Item O.7 of Schedule 2 of TM-EIAO, a separate EIA
study would be conducted by the future operator to fulfil all the statutory
requirements and procedures under the EIAO.
Railway Stations at TCE and TCW (by others)
4.6.3.36
Railway Station at TCE would be at-grade
and is located at 150m from TCE (A1-1) and is partially screened by commercial
buildings next to COM-1 and COM-2. Since the detail design will be conducted by
the railway operator, there is no design information on the proposed TCE
station. Hence, analysis has been conducted to determine the maximum allowable
SWL based on the separation distance from the nearest NSR TCE (A1-1-05) to
various distances from the station boundary. Table 4.32 shows the maximum allowable SWL. Detailed calculation is
shown in Appendix 4.17.
Table 4.32 Summary of maximum allowable SWL of Railway Station at TCE
Plant Item |
Location |
Maximum Allowable SWL[1],
dB(A) |
Railway Station at TCE |
At station boundary |
93 |
10m from station boundary |
94 |
Note:
[1] As
the proposed Railway Stations at TCE and TCW and
its associated railway system is a Designated Project under Item A.2 of
Schedule 2 of TM-EIAO, a separate study would be conducted by the rail operator
to fulfil all the statutory requirements and procedures under the EIAO. The
maximum SWL at different distance has been adopted for assessment.
4.6.3.37
Railway Station at TCW, the separation
distance to both the nearest existing residential premises at Yat Tung Estate
and planned residential premises at TCW (TCW-1) are about 30m. However, this
station would be underground and hence airborne train noise is not an
issue. The only airborne noise impacts
would be from the ventilation shafts and associated facilities with locations
to be further determined. Since the detail design will be conducted by the
railway operator, there is no design information on the proposed TCE station.
Hence, analysis has been conducted to determine the maximum allowable SWL based
on the separation distance to the nearest NSR at the nearest station boundary,
the northern end and southern end of station respectively. Table 4.33 shows the maximum allowable SWL. Detailed calculation is
shown in Appendix 4.17.
Table 4.33 Summary of maximum allowable SWL of Railway Station at TCW
Plant Item |
Location |
Maximum Allowable SWL[1], dB(A) |
Railway
Station at TCW |
30m
from station boundary |
77 |
50m
from station boundary |
81 |
|
100m
from station boundary |
87 |
Note:
[1] As the proposed Railway
Stations at TCE and TCW and its associated railway system is a Designated
Project under Item A.2 of Schedule 2 of TM-EIAO, a separate study would be
conducted by the rail operator to fulfil all the statutory requirements and
procedures under the EIAO. The maximum SWL at different distance has been
adopted for assessment.
4.6.3.38
These predicted maximum allowable SWL are
in similar range as those predicted in other EIA report (e.g. Approved EIA
report for Shatin to Central Link – Tai Wai to Hung Hom Section
(AEIAR-167/2012) and Shatin to Central Link – Mong Kok East to Hung Hom Section
(AEIAR-165/2012)).
4.6.3.39
The Contractor shall install acoustic
louvres, noise barrier or acoustic enclosure as appropriate to ensure the
specified maximum SWLs as shown in Tables
4.32 and 4.33 will not be
exceeded. The future design and selection of the equipment shall also aim to
reduce the effect of tonality at the NSRs as much as practicable. However, the
Contractor shall also take into account the latest available information at
time of detail design to review and update the maximum allowable SWL as
appropriate.
4.6.3.40
As the proposed Railway
Stations at TCE and TCW and its associated railway system is a separate
Designated Project under Item A.2 of Schedule 2 of TM-EIAO, a separate study
would be conducted by the rail operator to fulfil all the statutory
requirements and procedures under the EIAO. Hence, the noise assessment will
only be conducted for planned NSRs within the TCE and TCW. The construction (except
the land formation of the Railway Station at TCE as part of the reclamation
process) and operation of the Railway Stations at TCE
and TCW are not under scope of this Project.
Existing HKIA / Planned Third Runway of HKIA (by others)
4.6.3.41 Fixed plant noise sources inside HKIA consist of operation of aircraft, Engine Run-Up Facilities (ERUFs), Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) of aircrafts, aircraft taxiing, etc.
4.6.3.42 According to the approved EIA report for 3RS (AEIAR-185/2014), fixed noise impacts induced from the operation of three runway system have been assessed for the TCE and TCW. The impacts also include the ventilation building for HKLR. Mitigation measure in terms of noise enclosure with at least 15dB(A) reduction at the ERUFs has been considered. The fixed noise impacts arising from the proposed noise source of the three runway system are not anticipated to be adverse and the noise level will be within the respective noise criterion (i.e., ANL-5 or prevailing noise level).
Cumulative Fixed Noise Impact
4.6.3.43
The predicted mitigated
fixed noise impact in the approved EIA report 3RS (AEIAR-185/2014) is extracted
and adopted in the cumulative fixed noise impact assessments of the planned
pumping stations in Section 4.6.3. The
cumulative mitigated fixed noise impacts are within the respective noise
criterion. Detail calculation is shown in Appendix 4.15 to 4.17 and summary of the cumulative impact is given in Table 4.34.
Table 4.34 Summary of cumulative impact
No.[1] |
NAP[2] |
ASR |
Max. Predicted
Sound Pressure Level, dB(A) |
Criterion, dB(A)[3] |
Compliance
[Y/N] |
N1 |
A1-1-05g |
C |
53 |
60 |
Y |
A1-2-10c |
B |
55 |
55 |
Y |
|
D1-1-01 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
|
C2-1-06 |
B |
54 |
55 |
Y |
|
C2-2-03 |
B |
53 |
55 |
Y |
|
C2-2-04 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
|
F1-2-03 |
B |
54 |
55 |
Y |
|
F2-1-02 |
B |
56 |
65 |
Y |
|
N2 |
TCV-8-01 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
TCV-2-01 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
|
TCV-2-02 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
|
TCV-3-01 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
|
TCV-4-02 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
|
TCV-5a-01 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
|
TCV-1-01 |
B |
50 |
55 |
Y |
|
TCV-1-04 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
|
TCV-1-06 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
|
TCW-1-04 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
|
N2-6 |
SLP-003 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
N3 |
A55a-001 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
A56-002 |
B |
54 |
55 |
Y |
|
A56-003 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
|
PSc-001 |
B |
51 |
55 |
Y |
|
N9 |
YTE-005 |
B |
52 |
55 |
Y |
N31 |
LNCP-001 |
N/A |
47 |
N/A |
N/A |
LNCP-003 |
N/A |
50 |
N/A |
N/A |
|
LNCP-004 |
N/A |
47 |
N/A |
N/A |
|
LNCP-005 |
N/A |
47 |
N/A |
N/A |
|
LNCP-009 |
N/A |
50 |
N/A |
N/A |
Note:
[1] NAP – Noise Assessment Points
[2] NM – Noise measurement location.
[3] Sports Ground and Boat
Maintenance Area operates during daytime and evening time only.
[4] N/A – Not applicable.
4.6.3.44
Given the transient nature of visitor using hiking trails and
mitigation measures as discussed in Section
4.6.4 are recommended to reduce the noise emission, adverse noise impact is
not anticipated.
4.6.4
Mitigation of Fixed Noise Sources Impact
4.6.4.1
For the
proposed noise sources which are located near to existing and
planned NSRs, the following tentative noise mitigation measures are considered:
·
All the pumps should be enclosed inside a
building structure;
·
Proper selection of quiet plant aiming to
reduce the tonality at NSRs;
·
Installation of silencer / acoustic
enclosure / acoustic louvre for the exhaust of ventilation system.
·
For underground train stations, sound
attenuators with sufficient attenuations can be installed to the ventilation
shafts.
·
Openings of ventilation systems should be
located away from NSRs as far as practicable.
4.6.4.2
The feasibility, practicability, programming and effectiveness of the above
mitigation measures have been reviewed by engineer. As the fixed noise impacts
for planned and existing NSRs will be within respective noise criteria, the number of dwellings,
classrooms and other sensitive receivers that will be exposed to noise impact exceeding
the criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM is nil.
4.6.5 Evaluation of Residual Fixed Noise Sources Impact
4.6.5.1
With the implementation of suitable mitigation measures, fixed noise
impacts are not expected. Adverse
residual noise impacts are therefore not anticipated. The total number of
existing dwellings, classrooms and other noise sensitive elements that will be
exposed to adverse residual noise impact exceeding the criteria
set in Annex 5 in the TM is nil.
4.7
Aircraft Noise Impact Assessment
4.7.1 Aircraft Noise Impact Assessment Methodology
4.7.1.1 According to the approved 3RS EIA (AEIAR-185/2014), the NEF noise contours assessment at year 2021 (interim phase), 2030 (worst operation mode) and 2032 (full operation mode) have been predicted. The NEFs as published from the approved 3RS EIA are shown in Figures 4.3a and 4.3b. The NEF results in the above EIA is referenced for the consideration of aircraft noise impact at TCE and TCW.
4.7.2 Identification of Aircraft Noise Impact
Identification of Assessment Area and Noise Sensitive Receivers
4.7.2.1 For operational aircraft noise assessment, the assessment area includes all planned NSRs of the project (Figure 4.9). Representative NSRs locations have been selected from Table 4.12 and are summarized in the table below.
4.7.2.2 As the aircraft noise emission is generated from other project and operation of aircraft noise sources is outside scope of this project, the noise assessment will be conducted for planned NSRs within TCW and TCE.
Table 4.36 Representative NSRs for aircraft noise assessment
No.[1] |
NSR |
Uses[2][3] |
No. of Storey[3] |
N1 |
Tung
Chung East (Planned NSR) |
R |
7 – 58 |
E |
8 – 11 |
||
N2 |
Tung
Chung West (Planned NSR) |
R |
3 – 38 |
E |
8 |
Notes:
[1] The
assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] R –
Residential Premises, E – Educational Institutions.
[3] Landuse
and no. of storey according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
4.7.2.3
The representative site
layouts for aircraft noise assessment have been confirmed with Planning
Department and Lands Department.
4.7.3 Prediction and Evaluation of Aircraft Noise Impact
4.7.3.1
As mentioned in Section 4.1.3, NSRs relying on opened
windows for ventilation should be planned beyond the NEF25 contour, except for
offices which should be beyond the NEF30 contour. The
NEF contours have been confirmed with Civil Aviation Department (CAD) and
Airport Authority Hong Kong (AAHK).
4.7.3.2 Based on the NEF results from approved EIA report for Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System (AEIAR-185/2014), the NEF 25 contour in the year 2021 will encroach onto the reclamation boundary at TCE. However, based on the 3RS EIA findings, the predicted NEF 25 contours of the 3RS would be away from the boundary of TCE upon the full commissioning of the 3RS, currently planned for 2023.
4.7.3.3 Regarding the operational year of the 3RS would need to be shifted beyond the programme stated in the 3RS EIA or the Project is developed in advance of operation of the 3RS of HKIA, the Project Proponent of this Project shall conduct a review on the dates of population intake so as to ensure that all the NSRs within TCE would not be adversely affected by aircraft noise. Moreover, without implementation of the 3RS project of the HKIA, it is noted that part of the proposed TCE reclamation on the seaward side would fall within the NEF 25 contour based on the current operation of HKIA. In that case, the planning of TCE which envisages a mix of residential and commercial development would need to be reviewed.
4.7.3.4 For TCW, the development boundary will be away from the predicted NEF 25 contours for all the operation modes for airport including the existing two runway system and the 3RS. Adverse aircraft noise impact is therefore not anticipated.
4.7.3.5 The total number of dwellings, classrooms and other noise sensitive receivers that will be exposed to noise impact exceeding the criteria is nil.
4.7.4 Mitigation of Aircraft Noise Impact
Direct Mitigation Measures
4.7.4.1
Though the NEF 25 contour
in year 2021 will encroach onto the reclamation boundary of TCE, according to
3RS EIA findings, the predicted NEF 25 contours of the 3RS would be away from
TCNTE upon the full commissioning of the 3RS, currently planned for 2023. Nevertheless,
appropriate development phasing for TCE will also be considered to ensure all the NSRs within TCE and TCW will be outside the NEF 25 noise contours
during the time of population intake. Hence, mitigation measures are not
required. The total number of noise sensitive receivers that will be benefited
from and be protected by the provision of direct mitigation measures is nil.
Indirect Mitigation
Measures
4.7.4.2
As appropriate development
phasing for TCE will be considered to ensure all the NSRs within TCE and TCW will be outside the NEF 25 noise contours
during the time of population, indirect mitigation
measures are not necessary. The total number of dwellings, classrooms
and other noise sensitive elements which quality for indirect mitigation
measures is nil.
4.7.5 Evaluation of Residual Aircraft Noise Impact
4.7.5.1
Adverse aircraft
noise impacts are not expected and adverse residual noise impacts are therefore not
anticipated.
4.8
Rail Airborne Noise Assessment
4.8.1 Rail Noise Impact Assessment Methodology
4.8.1.1
As discussed in Section 4.2.2, the proposed Rail Stations at TCE and TCW and its
associated railway system are a separate DP and a separate EIA would be conducted by the rail operator to fulfil all the statutory
requirements and procedures under the EIAO. Hence, the noise assessment will be
conducted for planned NSRs within TCE and TCW.
4.8.1.2
Railway noise impact is predicted
according to “Calculation of Railway Noise (1995)” (CRN) by the UK Department
of Transport. A summary of correction factors are given in Appendix 4.18.
4.8.1.3
The assessment area for rail noise impact
assessment includes areas within 300m from the boundary of the TCE which is
shown in Figure 4.1. For TCW,
the rail alignment would be underground and hence airborne rail noise impacts
are not anticipated.
4.8.1.4
Requests have been made to the railway
operator to obtain future operating scenario such as types, headway, speed
profiles, etc. Details of railway operation near TCE are summarized in the
table below.
Table 4.38 Operation details
near TCE and TCW
Operation Parameters |
TCL |
AEL |
Existing TCL
and AEL before Year 2026 (Phases 1 and 2 population intake) |
||
Maximum Train
Length, m |
184.2 |
184.2 |
No. of car |
8 |
8 |
Headway per 30
minutes (Trains per hour) |
6 (12) |
3 (6) |
Maximum
operating speed in Tung Chung km/h |
135 |
135 |
Realigned TCL
after Year 2026 and before Year 2030 (Phases 1 to 3 population intake) |
||
Maximum Train
Length, m |
184.2 |
229.2 |
No. of car |
8 |
10 |
Headway per 30
minutes (Trains per hour) |
9[3] (18) |
4 (8) |
Maximum
operating speed in Tung Chung km/h |
100 (Between portal and TCE Railway Station) / 60
(TCE Railway Station) / 135 (from TCE Railway Station to the eastern
end of TCE) |
135 |
Realigned TCL
after Year 2026 (Phases 1 to 4 population intake) |
||
Maximum Train
Length, m |
184.2 |
229.2 |
No. of car |
8 |
10 |
Headway per 30
minutes (Trains per hour) |
9 (18) |
4 (8) |
Maximum
operating speed in Tung Chung km/h |
100 (Between portal and TCE Railway Station) / 60
(TCE Railway Station) / 135 (from TCE Railway Station to the eastern
end of TCE) |
135 |
4.8.1.5
Rail noise source term has been conducted
at Ta Pang Po to validate previous approved EIA assumptions. The selected
location is shown in Appendix 4.19. The measurement location was set at a
horizontal separation of approximately 25 – 70m from the existing at-grade
ballast track at a height 5m above ground level. Table below summarizes the
rail noise source term and compares with the adopted source term in EIA-029/BC.
Detailed calculation is shown in Appendix 4.19.
Table
4.39 Comparison of source term in EIA-029/BC and current
measurements
Train |
Direction |
Estimated Speed, km/h |
Distance, m |
Measurement Result, dB(A) |
Corrected SEL, dB(A)[2][3] |
|
Lmax |
SEL [1] |
|||||
AEL |
To Hong Kong |
131 |
25 |
77.6 |
84.5 |
75.8 |
50 |
74.2 |
81.5 |
75.8 |
|||
70 |
72.0 |
79.3 |
75.0 |
|||
126 |
25 |
78.9 |
84.9 |
76.5 |
||
50 |
75.5 |
81.9 |
76.5 |
|||
70 |
73.1 |
79.7 |
75.7 |
|||
129 |
25 |
77.0 |
83.8 |
75.2 |
||
50 |
73.8 |
81.2 |
75.6 |
|||
70 |
72.3 |
79.0 |
74.8 |
|||
To Airport |
129 |
29 |
73.8 |
81.7 |
73.7 |
|
54 |
71.2 |
79.6 |
74.3 |
|||
74 |
68.8 |
77.9 |
74.0 |
|||
128 |
29 |
73.7 |
81.1 |
73.2 |
||
54 |
71.1 |
79.1 |
73.9 |
|||
74 |
69.0 |
77.7 |
73.9 |
|||
128 |
29 |
72.2 |
80.9 |
73.0 |
||
54 |
69.2 |
78.9 |
73.7 |
|||
74 |
67.2 |
77.1 |
73.3 |
|||
TCL |
To Hong Kong |
129 |
25 |
82.6 |
87.3 |
78.7 |
50 |
78.5 |
83.7 |
78.1 |
|||
70 |
75.5 |
81.4 |
77.2 |
|||
123 |
25 |
80.9 |
87.1 |
78.9 |
||
50 |
77.6 |
84.2 |
79.0 |
|||
70 |
75.5 |
82.0 |
78.2 |
|||
123 |
25 |
80.6 |
86.8 |
78.6 |
||
50 |
77.0 |
84.0 |
78.8 |
|||
70 |
74.6 |
81.6 |
77.8 |
|||
To Tung Chung |
126 |
29 |
79.6 |
84.8 |
77.0 |
|
54 |
76.7 |
82.4 |
77.3 |
|||
74 |
73.9 |
80.3 |
76.6 |
|||
132 |
29 |
79.2 |
84.1 |
75.9 |
||
54 |
75.8 |
81.7 |
76.2 |
|||
74 |
73.7 |
80.0 |
75.9 |
|||
126 |
29 |
78.7 |
84.2 |
76.4 |
||
54 |
74.9 |
81.6 |
76.5 |
|||
74 |
73.4 |
79.7 |
76.0 |
|||
124 |
29 |
76.3 |
82.6 |
75.0 |
||
54 |
73.8 |
80.3 |
75.4 |
|||
74 |
70.9 |
77.9 |
74.3 |
|||
125 |
29 |
75.2 |
82.2 |
74.5 |
||
54 |
71.9 |
79.5 |
74.5 |
|||
74 |
70.2 |
77.8 |
74.2 |
|||
Average |
75.8 |
|||||
Minimum |
73.0 |
|||||
Maximum |
79.0 |
|||||
Reference
Source Term[4] |
- |
135 |
- |
- |
- |
83.9 |
Notes:
[1] The separation distance between measurement locations and track
to Hong Kong Station is 25 – 70m while the separation distance between
measurement location and track to Tung Chung Station / Airport is 29 - 74m. The
measured Lmax and SEL are referenced at 8-car and specified speed at that particular section.
[2] Correct noise level to 25m at 135 km/h at 1 car as in Lantau and
Airport Railway Environmental Assessment Report EIA-029/BC.
[3] Corrections applied including:
i.
Distance correction: 10log(D1/D0),
where D1 is measurement
distance, D0 is 25m;
ii.
Speed correction: 20log(V1/V0),
where V1 is train speed, V0 is 135km/h.
[4] According to Lantau and Airport Railway Environmental Assessment
Report EIA-029/BC and Equation 15.21 in Transportation Noise Reference Book,
1987. Equation 15.21 in Transportation Noise Reference Book is listed below
SEL = Lmax + 10log(L/V)+10.5-10log[4D/(4D2
+1)+2tan-11/(2D)]
Where L =
Train length, m
V = Train speed,
km/h
d = Distance from track, m
D = d/L
4.8.1.6
As shown in Table 4.39, all the corrected SEL is in the range of 73dB(A) to
79dB(A) at 25m with speed 135km/h for 1 car, whereas a SEL of 83.9 dB(A) at 25m
with speed 135km/h was adopted in previous approved EIA study. The rolling
stock for AEL and TCL was not yet finalized and there was no definitive source
noise data at the time when preparing the EIA study (EIA-029/BC). In order to
cater for a more conservative assessment, the maximum SEL 83.9dB(A) at 25m at 1
car with speed 135 km/h is adopted as rail noise source term and the source
term parameters are summarized in the table below.
Table
4.40 Rail noise source term to be adopted in this noise
assessment
Parameters |
TCL |
AEL |
SEL for 1 car at 25m at
135km/h, dB(A) |
83.9 |
83.9 |
SEL for 8 car
at 25m at 135km/h, dB(A) |
92.9 |
N/A |
SEL for 10 car
at 25m at 135km/h, dB(A) |
N/A |
93.9 |
Track type |
On Ballast Track |
On Ballast Track |
Rail |
Continuously weld rail |
Continuously weld rail |
Speed |
[1] |
[1] |
Notes:
[1] N/A – Not applicable.
4.8.1.7
Noise measurements for rail noise assessment is given
in Appendix 4.20.
4.8.2 Identification of Rail Noise Impact
Identification of
Assessment Area and Noise Sensitive Receivers
4.8.2.1 For operational rail airborne noise assessment, representative NSRs locations have been selected from Table 4.12 and are summarized in the table below and illustrated in Figure 4.10.
4.8.2.2
As discussed in Section 4.2.2, as the proposed Railway
Stations at TCE and TCW and
its associated railway system is a separate Designated Project under Item A.2
of Schedule 2 of TM-EIAO, a separate study would be conducted by the rail
operator to fulfil all the statutory requirements and procedures under the
EIAO. The noise
emission is generated from other project and operation of planned TCE station and
associated railway system are outside scope of this project, operation rail
airborne noise assessment will be conducted for planned NSRs within TCE.
Table
4.43 Representative NSRs for rail airborne noise assessment
(before Year 2026)
No.[1] |
NSR |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses[4][5] |
ASR[6] |
No. of Storey |
Daytime & Evening/ Night-time Criterion Leq
30 min dB(A)[7] |
Criterion Lmax dB(A)[8] |
N1 |
Tung Chung East (Planned
NSR) |
B1-1-02 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
85 |
B1-1-03 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-05 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-07 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-09 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-10 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-11 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-12 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-13 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-14 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-15 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-2-01 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-06 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-07 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-10 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-11 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-16 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-23 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-24 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-38 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-49 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-50 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-56 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-65 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-69 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
Notes:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened
windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R – Residential Premises.
[5] Landuse according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan
(RODP).
[6] Details
on the determination of Area Sensitivity Rating are shown in Appendix 4.1a.
[7] The criteria are presented for [Daytime and evening time
criterion / night-time criterion]. Noise criterion is proposed according to
TM-Places.
[8] Noise criterion between 2300 – 0700 hours according to TM-EIAO.
Table 4.43a Representative NSRs for rail airborne noise
assessment (After Year 2026 and
before Year 2030)
No.[1] |
NSR |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses[4][5] |
ASR[6] |
No. of Storey |
Daytime & Evening/ Night-time Criterion Leq
30 min dB(A)[7] |
Criterion Lmax dB(A)[8] |
N1 |
Tung Chung East (Planned
NSR) |
A1-1-01a |
R |
C |
50 |
70/60 |
85 |
A1-1-01b |
R |
C |
50 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-1-02a |
R |
C |
45 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-1-02b |
R |
C |
45 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-1-03 |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-1-04a |
R |
B |
45 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-1-04i |
R |
C |
45 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-1-05a |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-1-05i |
R |
C |
50 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-1-08c |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-1-09 |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-1-19a |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-2-01a |
R |
C |
31 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-2-01b |
R |
C |
31 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-2-02a |
R |
C |
50 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-2-02b |
R |
C |
50 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-2-03 |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-2-04l |
R |
C |
31 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-2-05l |
R |
C |
50 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-2-10c |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-2-20c |
R |
B |
31 |
65/55 |
|||
A2-4-07 |
R |
C |
32 |
70/60 |
|||
A2-4-08 |
R |
C |
32 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-1-02 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-03 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-05 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-07 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-09 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-10 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-11 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-12 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-13 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-14 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-15 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-2-01 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-06 |
R |
B |
38 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-2-07 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-10 |
R |
B |
38 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-2-11 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-16 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-23 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-24 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-38 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-49 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-50 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-56 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-65 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-69 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
Notes:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened
windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R – Residential Premises.
[5] Landuse according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan
(RODP).
[6] Details
on the determination of Area Sensitivity Rating are shown in Appendix 4.1a.
[7] The criteria are presented for [Daytime and evening time
criterion / night-time criterion]. Noise criterion is proposed according to
TM-Places.
[8] Noise criterion between 2300 – 0700 hours according to TM-EIAO.
Table
4.43b Representative NSRs for rail airborne noise assessment
(After Year 2030)
No.[1] |
NSR |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses[4][5] |
ASR[6] |
No. of Storey |
Daytime & Evening/ Night-time Criterion Leq
30 min dB(A)[7] |
Criterion Lmax dB(A)[8] |
N1 |
Tung Chung East (Planned
NSR) |
A1-1-01a |
R |
C |
50 |
70/60 |
85 |
A1-1-01b |
R |
C |
50 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-1-02a |
R |
C |
45 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-1-02b |
R |
C |
45 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-1-03 |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-1-04a |
R |
B |
45 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-1-04i |
R |
C |
45 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-1-05a |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-1-05i |
R |
C |
50 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-1-08c |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-1-09 |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-1-19a |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-2-01a |
R |
C |
31 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-2-01b |
R |
C |
31 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-2-02a |
R |
C |
50 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-2-02b |
R |
C |
50 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-2-03 |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-2-04l |
R |
C |
31 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-2-05l |
R |
C |
50 |
70/60 |
|||
A1-2-10c |
R |
B |
50 |
65/55 |
|||
A1-2-20c |
R |
B |
31 |
65/55 |
|||
A2-4-07 |
R |
B |
32 |
65/55 |
|||
A2-4-08 |
R |
B |
32 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-02 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-03 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-05 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-07 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-09 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-10 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-11 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-12 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-13 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-14 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-1-15 |
R |
B |
36 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-2-01 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-06 |
R |
B |
38 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-2-07 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-10 |
R |
B |
38 |
65/55 |
|||
B1-2-11 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-16 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-23 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-24 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-38 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-49 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-50 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-56 |
R |
C |
38 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-65 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
|||
B1-2-69 |
R |
C |
39 |
70/60 |
|||
C0-2-01 |
R |
B |
21 |
65/55 |
|||
C0-2-02 |
R |
B |
21 |
65/55 |
|||
C1-1-01 |
R |
B |
32 |
65/55 |
|||
C1-1-49 |
R |
B |
32 |
65/55 |
|||
C2-1-03 |
R |
B |
37 |
65/55 |
Notes:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened
windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R – Residential Premises.
[5] Landuse according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan
(RODP).
[6] Details
on the determination of Area Sensitivity Rating are shown in Appendix 4.1a.
[7] The criteria are presented for [Daytime and evening time
criterion / night-time criterion]. Noise criterion is proposed according to
TM-Places.
[8] Noise criterion between 2300 – 0700 hours according to TM-EIAO.
4.8.2.3 The representative site layouts for rail noise assessment have been confirmed with Planning Department and Lands Department. As discussed in Section 4.5, commercial developments are strategically planned to protect planned NSRs at the back of TCE. A review would be conducted for the environmental noise performance of the concerned NSRs if there is a programme mismatch between occupation of commercial buildings and population intake of residential developments. Assumption of phasing of the relevant commercial lots and the residential uses intended to be protected are listed below.
Table 4.43d Schedule of commercial developments
Land Lot Nos. for Commercial Buildings as Noise Screens in TCE |
Phase Intended to be Protected |
Completion Year |
|
COM-1 |
1 and
2 |
2023 |
|
A1-1[1] |
1, 2
and 3 |
2027 |
|
A1-2[1] |
1, 2
and 3 |
2027 |
|
COM-2 |
4 |
2030 |
|
COM-3 |
4 |
2030 |
Notes:
[1] Commercial development within the CDA site would be
constructed concurrently.
Inventory of Noise Sources
4.8.2.4
Potential rail airborne noise impacts are
anticipated. TCL and AEL which runs on the at-grade ballast track between MTR
Tung Chung Station and MTR Tsing Yi Station is located to the southern side of
TCE. The noise inventory in the approved EIA report for Lantau and
Airport Railway Environmental Assessment Report (EIA-029/BC)
has been adopted and confirmed with the railway operator.
4.8.3
Prediction and Evaluation of Rail Noise
Impact
Scenarios
4.8.3.1
An unmitigated scenario is conducted on the worst operation mode representing the
maximum noise emission.
The operation parameters have been discussed in Section 4.8.1. The maximum number of headway, train length and
speed as advised by the railway operator have been adopted for worst operation
mode as shown in Table 4.38. Mitigated
scenario will be conducted if unmitigated scenario exceeds respective criteria.
Three scenarios have been conducted as shown in Table 4.38 and listed below:
·
Phases 1
and 2 population
intake at TCE before Year 2026 for
existing TCL and AEL alignment;
·
Phase 1, 2 and 3 population intake after Year 2026 and before Year 2030. i.e. with TCE Railway
Station and without the implementation of Phase 4; and
·
Phases 1 to
4 population intake at TCE with the operation of TCE Railway Station after
Year 2030.
Prediction of Noise Impact
4.8.3.2
From Table
4.40, the adopted SEL at 25m at 1 car with Speed 135km/h is 83.9dB(A). For
Lmax prediction, Equation 15.21 in the Transportation Noise
Reference Book 1987 is adopted to calculate Lmax at NSRs and façade
correction is included.
4.8.3.3
The predicted rail noise levels at the representative NSRs are presented
in the table below and the rail noise prediction has included building
screening such as commercial buildings at COM-2,
COM-3, etc which have been strategically located to provide certain screening. Since the daytime and nighttime
peak headways are the same, the predicted railway noise levels are also the
same for both periods. Details are provided in Appendix 4.21.
Table 4.44 Predicted rail noise impacts – unmitigated
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses[4] |
Criterion |
Predicted Noise Levels |
Exceedance[6] |
|||
Leq
30 min dB(A)[5] |
Lmax,
dB(A) |
Leq
30 min, dB(A) |
Lmax,
dB(A) |
Leq 30 min,
dB(A) |
Lmax, dB(A) |
||||
Phase 1 and Phase 2 population
intake before Year 2026 |
|||||||||
N1 |
B1-1 |
B1-1-02 to B1-1-03, B1-1-05, B1-1-07,
B1-1-09 to B1-1-15 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
40-56 |
83 |
0/1 |
0 |
B1-2 |
B1-2-01, B1-2-06 to B1-2-07, B1-2-10 to
B1-2-11, B1-2-16, B1-2-23 to B1-2-24, B1-2-38, B1-2-49 to B1-2-50, B1-2-56,
B1-2-65, B1-2-69 |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
45-62 |
83-85 |
0/2 |
0 |
|
Phase 1, 2 and 3 population
intake after Year 2026 and before
Year 2030 |
|||||||||
N1 |
A1-1 |
A1-1-03, A1-1-04a, A1-1-05a, A1-1-08c,
A1-1-09, A1-1-19a |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
29-55 |
82-83 |
0/0 |
0 |
A1-1-01a to A1-1-01b, A1-1-02a to
A1-1-02b, A1-1-04i, A1-1-05i |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
48-65 |
82-83 |
0/5 |
0 |
||
A1-2 |
A1-2-03, A1-2-10c, A1-2-20c |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
50-59 |
83-84 |
0/4 |
0 |
|
A1-2-01a to A1-2-01b, A1-2-02a to
A1-2-02b, A1-2-04l, A1-2-05l |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
62-67 |
83-84 |
0/7 |
0 |
||
A2-4 |
A2-4-07 to A2-4-08 |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
61-63 |
83 |
0/3 |
0 |
|
B1-1 |
B1-1-02 to B1-1-03, B1-1-05, B1-1-07,
B1-1-09 to B1-1-15 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
40-59 |
81-82 |
0/4 |
0 |
|
B1-2 |
B1-2-06, B1-2-10 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
42-48 |
82 |
0/0 |
0 |
|
B1-2-01, B1-2-07, B1-2-11, B1-2-16,
B1-2-23 to B1-2-24, B1-2-38, B1-2-49 to B1-2-50, B1-2-56, B1-2-65, B1-2-69 |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
51-61 |
82 |
0/1 |
0 |
||
Phase 1 to 4 population
intake after 2030 |
|||||||||
N1 |
A1-1 |
A1-1-03, A1-1-04a, A1-1-05a, A1-1-08c,
A1-1-09, A1-1-19a |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
29-55 |
82-83 |
0/0 |
0 |
A1-1-01a to A1-1-01b, A1-1-02a to A1-1-02b,
A1-1-04i, A1-1-05i |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
48-65 |
82-83 |
0/5 |
0 |
||
A1-2 |
A1-2-03, A1-2-10c, A1-2-20c |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
46-55 |
83-84 |
0/0 |
0 |
|
A1-2-01a to A1-2-01b, A1-2-02a to
A1-2-02b, A1-2-04l, A1-2-05l |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
60-67 |
83-84 |
0/7 |
0 |
||
A2-4 |
A2-4-07 to A2-4-08 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
54-58 |
83 |
0/3 |
0 |
|
B1-1 |
B1-1-02 to B1-1-03, B1-1-05, B1-1-07,
B1-1-09 to B1-1-15 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
40-59 |
81-82 |
0/4 |
0 |
|
B1-2 |
B1-2-06, B1-2-10 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
42-48 |
82 |
0/0 |
0 |
|
B1-2-01, B1-2-07, B1-2-11, B1-2-16,
B1-2-23 to B1-2-24, B1-2-38, B1-2-49 to B1-2-50, B1-2-56, B1-2-65, B1-2-69 |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
51-61 |
82 |
0/1 |
0 |
||
C0-2 |
C0-2-01 to C0-2-02 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
36-48 |
83-84 |
0/0 |
0 |
|
C1-1 |
C1-1-01, C1-1-49 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
51-62 |
83 |
0/7 |
0 |
|
C2-1 |
C2-1-03 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
49-58 |
83-84 |
0/3 |
0 |
Notes:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened
windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise assessment point.
[3] The first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R – Residential Premises.
[5] The noise criteria are presented for [daytime and evening time
criterion / night-time criterion].
[6] The number of exceedance is presented for [daytime and evening /
night-time] period. Bold value denotes
non-compliance with TM-EIAO’s criteria.
4.8.3.4
It can be seen that
most of the NSRs met the criteria except some NSRs exceed the night time noise
criterion of 1 – 7 dB(A). Hence, mitigation measures are required.
4.8.3.5
The total number of dwellings that will be exposed to rail noise impact
exceeding the criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM have been calculated. It is
predicted that a total of about 110 dwellings will be exposed to rail noise
impact under unmitigated scenario during phase 1; 1020 dwellings during phase 3
and 980 dwellings during phase 4.
4.8.4
Mitigation of Rail
Noise Impact
4.8.4.1
As the unmitigated
scenario has exceeded the respective noise criterion, the proposed mitigation
measures are shown in Figure 4.15a and Figure 4.15b and summarized in the table below. The overall mitigation measures
for road traffic noise and railway noise are given in Figure 4.16.
Table 4.45 Proposed rail noise mitigation measures
No. |
Location |
Type of Noise Barrier |
Key NSRs Protected |
Phase 1 and Phase 2 population intake
before Year 2026 |
|||
N1 |
Facade of residential block at B1-2 |
1.5m long architectural fin and facade with no
openable windows |
B1-2-06, B1-2-07 and B1-2-11 |
Phase 1 to 3 population
intake after Year 2026 and before
Year 2030 and Phase 1 to 4 population intake after Year 2030 |
|||
SE1 |
Along the
tracks of Tung Chung Line facing B0-2
and COM-1 |
Approx. 325m long, semi enclosure |
A1-1-04i, A1-1-05i, B1-1-07, B1-1-09, B1-2-01, B1-2-38 |
SE2 |
Along the tracks of Tung Chung Line facing A1-2 and C1-1 |
Approx. 210m long, semi enclosure |
A1-2-04l,
A1-2-05l, A1-2-10c, A1-2-20c, A1-2-20d, A2-4-07, A2-4-08 |
SE3 |
Along the track of Tung Chung Line to Tung Chung
direction facing C1-1 to C2-1 |
Approx.
390m long, semi enclosure |
|
SE4 |
Along
the track along the track of
Tung Chung Line to Hong Kong direction facing C1-1 and C2-1 |
Approx.
630m long, semi enclosure |
4.8.4.2
The predicted mitigated rail noise levels at the representative NSRs are
presented in the table below. Details are provided in Appendix 4.21a.
Table
4.46 Predicted mitigated rail noise impacts – mitigated
No.[1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses[4] |
Criterion |
Predicted Noise Levels |
Exceedance[6] |
|||
Leq
30 min dB(A)[5] |
Lmax,
dB(A) |
Leq
30 min, dB(A) |
Lmax,
dB(A) |
Leq 30 min,
dB(A) |
Lmax, dB(A) |
||||
Phase 1 and Phase 2 population
intake before Year 2026 |
|||||||||
N1 |
B1-1 |
B1-1-07, B1-1-09 to B1-1-14 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
40-55 |
83 |
0/0 |
0 |
B1-2 |
B1-2-01, B1-2-06, B1-2-10, B1-2-16,
B1-2-23 to B1-2-24, B1-2-38, B1-2-49 to B1-2-50, B1-2-56, B1-2-65, B1-2-69 |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
45-60 |
83-85 |
0/0 |
0 |
|
Phase 1, 2 and 3 population
intake after Year 2026 and before
Year 2030 |
|||||||||
N1 |
A1-1 |
A1-1-03, A1-1-04a, A1-1-05a, A1-1-08c,
A1-1-09, A1-1-19a |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
29-52 |
82-83 |
0/0 |
0 |
A1-1-04i, A1-1-05i |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
45-57 |
82-83 |
0/0 |
0 |
||
A1-2 |
A1-2-03, A1-2-10c, A1-2-20c |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
47-51 |
83-84 |
0/0 |
0 |
|
A1-2-04l, A1-2-05l |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
45-58 |
83-84 |
0/0 |
0 |
||
A2-4 |
A2-4-07 to A2-4-08 |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
47-52 |
83 |
0/0 |
0 |
|
B1-1 |
B1-1-07, B1-1-09 to B1-1-14 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
40-50 |
81-82 |
0/0 |
0 |
|
B1-2 |
B1-2-06, B1-2-10 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
39-46 |
82 |
0/0 |
0 |
|
B1-2-01, B1-2-16, B1-2-23 to B1-2-24,
B1-2-38, B1-2-49 to B1-2-50, B1-2-56, B1-2-65, B1-2-69 |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
42-57 |
82 |
0/0 |
0 |
||
Phase 1 to 4 population
intake after 2030 |
|||||||||
N1 |
A1-1 |
A1-1-03, A1-1-04a, A1-1-05a, A1-1-08c,
A1-1-09, A1-1-19a |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
29-52 |
82-83 |
0/0 |
0 |
A1-1-04i, A1-1-05i |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
45-57 |
82-83 |
0/0 |
0 |
||
A1-2 |
A1-2-03, A1-2-10c, A1-2-20c |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
43-51 |
83-84 |
0/0 |
0 |
|
A1-2-04l, A1-2-05l |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
43-58 |
83-84 |
0/0 |
0 |
||
A2-4 |
A2-4-07 to A2-4-08 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
40-50 |
83 |
0/0 |
0 |
|
B1-1 |
B1-1-07, B1-1-09 to B1-1-14 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
40-50 |
81-82 |
0/0 |
0 |
|
B1-2 |
B1-2-06, B1-2-10 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
39-46 |
81 |
0/0 |
0 |
|
B1-2-01, B1-2-16, B1-2-23 to B1-2-24,
B1-2-38, B1-2-49 to B1-2-50, B1-2-56, B1-2-65, B1-2-69 |
R |
70/60 |
85 |
42-57 |
82 |
0/0 |
0 |
||
C0-2 |
C0-2-01 to C0-2-02 |
R |
65/55 |
85 |
33-44 |
83-84 |
0/0 |
0 |
Notes:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened
windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise assessment point.
[3] The first layer of NSRs is included.
[4] R – Residential Premises.
[5] The noise criteria are presented for [daytime and evening time
criterion / night-time criterion].
[6] The number of exceedance is presented for [daytime and evening /
night-time] period. Bold value denotes
non-compliance with TM-EIAO’s criteria.
4.8.4.3
With the proposed mitigation measures, all the representative NSRs will
be within the respective noise criterion. The feasibility, practicability,
programming and effectiveness have been reviewed by engineer. The total number
of dwellings, classrooms and other noise sensitive receivers that will be
exposed to noise impact exceeding the criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM is nil. It
should be noted that the Railway Stations at TCE and TCW and its associated
railway system is a Designated Project under Item A.2 of Schedule 2 of TM-EIAO.
A separate EIA study will therefore be conducted by the railway operator to
fulfil all the statutory requirements and procedures under the EIAO. Hence, the
proposed mitigation measures in Section
4.8.4 are tentative for cumulative assessment purpose in this EIA and all the mitigation
measures will be revised by the railway operator during their Schedule 2 EIA.
4.8.4.4 Besides, as discussed in Section 4.8.2, the assessment has based on the timely implementation of the noise non-sensitive building to the north of NLH / existing railway. This arrangement has been agreed with Planning Department and Lands Department.
4.8.5
Evaluation of Residual
Rail Noise Impact
4.8.5.1
As
all the NSRs within TCE are within the respective noise criterion, adverse residual
noise impacts are therefore not anticipated. The total number of dwellings,
classrooms and other noise sensitive receivers that will be exposed to adverse residual noise impact exceeding the
criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM is
nil.
4.9
Rail Groundborne Noise Assessment
4.9.1 Rail Noise Impact Assessment Methodology
4.9.1.1
When
trains operate in tunnels that are located in close proximity to occupied
structures, vibrations associated with train passbys will be transmitted
through the ground and structure, and radiated as noise in the spaces occupied
within the structure. Depending on the source strength and receiver
sensitivity, noise and vibration levels may be high enough to cause annoyance
to the planned NSRs.
4.9.1.2
The
current prediction methodology recommended by the “High-Speed Ground
Transportation Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment”, 1998 is used in this EIA
study. The manual is issued by the US Department of Transportation and is
intended to provide guidance in preparing and reviewing the noise and
vibrations sections of environmental submittals to the US Government. The
methodology had been applied to a number of transit systems in Hong Kong over
the years, including:
·
Shatin to
Central Link – Tai Wai to Hung Hom (AEIAR-167/2012);
·
Shatin
to Central Link Stabling Sidings at Hung Hom Freight Yard (AEIAR-164/2012);
·
Kowloon
Southern Link (ARIAR-083/2005);
·
Shatin
to Central Link – Hung Hom to Admiralty Section (AEIAR-166/2012);
·
Shatin
to Central Link – Mong Kok East to Hung Hom Section (AEIAR-165/2012); and
·
Kwun
Tong Line Extension (AEIAR-154/2010).
4.9.1.3
It
should be noted that the EIA report for AEL and TCL does not include vibration
source term for groundborne noise assessment. Vibration measurements have therefore been conducted at suitable locations to establish the
vibration level generated by both AEL and TCL running at tunnel sections. These
measured vibration levels are then adopted for groundborne noise assessment for
the planned NSRs within TCW. In order to introduce conservatism in the assessment
results, the assessment methodology has only included those correction factors
with positive correction values such as Building Vibration Resonance (BVR),
Turnout and Crossover (TOC). All the correction factors with negative values
such as Building Coupling Factor (BCF) have not been included. Details of
calculation are given in Appendix 4.22
and vibration source term measurement has been given in Appendix 4.22a.
4.9.2 Identification of Rail Groundborne Noise Impact
Identification of
Assessment Area and Noise Sensitive Receivers
4.9.2.1 For operational rail groundborne noise assessment, assessment area cover planned NSRs along underground alignment and representative NSRs locations have been selected from Table 4.12 and are summarized in the table below and illustrated in Figure 4.11.
4.9.2.2
As discussed in Section 4.2.2, as the proposed Railway
Stations at TCE and TCW and
its associated railway system is a separate Designated Project under Item A.2
of Schedule 2 of TM-EIAO, a separate study would be conducted by the rail
operator to fulfil all the statutory requirements and procedures under the
EIAO. As the noise
emission is generated from other project and operation of the planned TCW
station and associated railway system are outside scope of this project,
operation ground borne noise assessment will be conducted for planned NSRs
within TCW.
Table 4.47 Representative NSRs for rail groundborne noise assessment
No. |
NAP[1] |
Uses[2][3] |
No. of
Storey[3] |
N2 |
TCW-1-01 |
R |
17 |
TCW-2-01 |
R |
18 |
Notes:
[1] NAP – Noise assessment point
[2] R – Residential Premises
[3] Landuse and no. of storey
according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP).
4.9.2.3
The representative site
layouts for rail noise assessment have been confirmed with Planning Department
and Lands Department.
Inventory of Noise Sources
4.9.2.4
Existing TCL running towards the proposed
Tung Chung West Railway Station generates groundborne noise to the nearby
planned NSRs. The validity of the inventory has been confirmed
with the railway operator.
4.9.3
Prediction and Evaluation of Rail Groundborne
Noise Impact
Scenarios
4.9.3.1
An unmitigated scenario is conducted on the worst operation mode representing the
maximum noise emission.
The operation parameters have been discussed in Section 4.8.1. The maximum number of headway, train length and
speed as advised by the rail operator have been adopted for worst operation
mode as shown in Table 4.38. Where
the groundborne noise exceedance were identified, mitigated scenario would be
made.
Prediction of Noise Impact
4.9.3.2
The predicted rail noise levels at the representative planned NSRs are
presented in the table below The prediction results showed that the night-time
criteria is achievable at the representative planned NSR. Details are provided in Appendix 4.23. The total number of
dwellings, classrooms and other noise sensitive receivers that will be exposed
to noise impact exceeding the criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM is nil.
Table
4.48 Predicted rail groundborne noise impacts for planned NSR
No. |
NAP[1][2] |
Uses[3] |
Criterion, Leq 30
min dB(A)[4] |
Max. Predicted Noise
Levels, Leq 30 min dB(A) |
Exceedance[5],
Leq 30 min dB(A) |
N2 |
TCW-1-01 |
R |
45 |
44 [6] |
N |
TCW-2-01 |
R |
45 |
34 [6] |
N |
Note:
[1] NAP – Noise assessment point
[2] The first layer of NSRs is included.
[3] R – Residential Premises
[4] The noise criterion is presented for night time period only which is
10dB(A) more stringent than daytime period.
[5] Bold value denotes
non-compliance with TM-EIAO’s criteria.
[6] Only those correction
factors with positive correction values such as Building Vibration Resonance
(BVR), Turnout and Crossover (TOC) have been included for conservative
assessment.
4.9.3.3
During operational phase, as the underground alignment between Railway Stations
at TCE and TCW and its associated railway system is a Designated Project under
Item A.2 of Schedule 2 of TM-EIAO, a separate EIA study will be conducted to
fulfil all the statutory requirements and procedures under the EIAO.
4.9.4
Mitigation of Rail
Noise Impact
4.9.4.1
Base on the latest
information, all the NSRs within TCW are within the respective noise criterion.
Hence, mitigation measures are not required. The total number of dwellings,
classrooms and other noise sensitive receivers that will be exposed to noise
impact exceeding the criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM is nil.
4.9.5
Evaluation of Residual
Rail Noise Impact
4.9.5.1
With the implementation of the proposed
mitigation measures, adverse residual environmental impacts are not
expected at this stage. The total number
of dwellings, classrooms and other noise sensitive receivers that will be
exposed to adverse residual noise
impact exceeding the criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM is nil.
4.10
Helicopter Noise Assessment
4.10.1 Helicopter Noise Impact Assessment Methodology
4.10.1.1
Helicopter noise will be generated during
manoeuvring over the helipad and during lateral (approach/departure) flight.
Operational modes that may generate noise will be considered. Helicopter noise
is considered as a ‘point’ source and will be evaluated based on standard
acoustic principle of point source propagation. Corrections will be applied for
the distance attenuation, façade, barrier or topographical effect where
applicable.
4.10.2
Identification of Helicopter Noise Impact
Identification of
Assessment Area and Noise Sensitive Receivers
4.10.2.1
Representative NSRs locations have been
selected from Table 4.12 and are summarized
in the table below and illustrated in Figure 4.12.
4.10.2.2
As the noise emission is generated from other project and operation of
helicopter noise sources are outside scope of this project, helicopter noise
assessment will be conducted for planned NSRs within TCE and TCW.
Table
4.49 Representative NSRs for helicopter noise assessment
No. [1] |
Location |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
No. of
Storey[5] |
N1 |
Tung Chung East (Planned
NSR) |
A1-2-01 |
R |
31 |
C2-2-02 |
R |
36 |
||
F1-1-03 |
R |
10 |
||
F2-2-02 |
R |
10 |
||
N2 |
Tung Chung West (Planned
NSR) |
TCV-1-06 |
R |
4 |
TCV-6-01 |
R |
38 |
[1] The assessment
will only include NSRs which rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise
assessment point.
[3] The first
layer of NSRs within 130m horizontal to the flight path of helicopter is
included. Appendix 4.24 shows the assessment area determination.
[4] R –
Residential Premises.
[5] Landuse and
no. of storey according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP)
4.10.2.3 The representative site layouts for helicopter noise assessment have
been confirmed with Planning Department and Lands Department.
Inventory of Noise Source
4.10.2.4
Potential helicopter noise impacts are anticipated due to GFS and
business helicopter operations. The helicopter noise source term based on the
Flight Manual AS 332 L2, Flight Manual EC 155 B1, Technical Description MD902
Explorer, Flight Manual AW139, European Aviation Safety Agency Type-Certificate
Data Sheet Sikorsky S-76 and S-92A have been confirmed with GFS and relevant parties.
4.10.2.5
The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has a stipulated reference
noise standard for helicopters with lateral movement for different flying modes
including approach, take-off and flyover. Besides, according to the Flight
Manual AS 332 L2, Flight Manual EC 155 B1, Technical Description MD 902
Explorer, European Aviation Safety Agency Type-Certificate Data Sheet Sikorsky
S-76 and S-92A, have presented a measured noise level for the types of
helicopters of concern. A comparison of the measured noise levels to the
maximum limit as specified in the ICAO are shown in table below.
Table
4.51 Helicopter noise data with lateral
movements
Flying Mod |
EPN, dB |
|||||||||||||
Super puma AS332
L2 |
EC155 B1 |
MD 902 |
AW139 |
S-76 |
S-92A |
EC175 |
||||||||
[1] |
[2] |
[1] |
[2] |
[1] |
[2] |
[1] |
[2] |
[1] |
[2] |
[1] |
[2] |
[1] |
[2] |
|
Approach |
96.1 |
100.7 |
95.7 |
97.9 |
89.6 |
95.3 |
94.1 |
99.3 |
97.7 |
98.3 |
97.5 |
101.8 |
95.1 |
98.8 |
Take-off |
99.7 |
99.7 |
92.2 |
96.9 |
85.4 |
94.5 |
90.3 |
98.3 |
96.0 |
97.3 |
94.6 |
100.8 |
89.8 |
95.8 |
Flyover |
93.6 |
98.7 |
89.0 |
95.9 |
83.5 |
93.3 |
89.8 |
97.3 |
93.2 |
96.3 |
97.2 |
99.8 |
91.0 |
93.8 |
Notes:
[1] Measured
noise levels according to the Flight Manual of AS 332 L2 and EC 155 B1 and
Technical Description MD 902 Explorer, European Aviation Safety Agency
Type-Certificate Data Sheet Sikorsky S-76 and S-92A.
[2] ICAO
reference limit.
[3] Lmax
= EPNdB-13, with reference to “Transportation Noise Reference Book” (Nelson,
1987), Equation (6a) “Conversion Relationship of Aircraft Noise Indices between
WECPNL and DENL” (Proceedings of 20th International Congress of
Acoustics), Section 2.1 “Consideration to noise index for evaluating airport
noise in Japan” (The 33rd International Congress and Exposition on
Noise Control Engineering) and Section 2 “Evaluation and Prediction of Airport
Noise in Japan” (Journal of the Acoustical Society of Japan).
4.10.2.6
The GFS helipad and HKBAC on Airport Island are about 4km and 3km away
from TCE and TCW respectively. Due to the large separation distance from the TCE
and TCW, helicopter noise impact will be mainly generated by flyover mode (Not above 1,500
ft according to Aeronautical Information Publication Amendment 06/15).
4.10.2.7
There is a helicopter holding area near Cathay City (H6) and one near
Tung Chung Bay (H10). The holding procedures used by helicopters according to
the Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP) Hong Kong Amendment 06/15 issued by Civil Aviation Department Hong Kong are shown in table below.
Table 4.52 Helicopter holding procedures
Location |
Altitude above mean sea level, ft |
Pak Mong (H5) |
Not above 1,000 |
Cathy City (H6) |
Not above 800 |
Freight Centre (H7) |
Not below 800 |
Tung Chung Bay (H10) |
800 – 1,000 |
4.10.2.8
It is also stated in Schedule 14, Cap.448c, Air Navigation (Hong Kong)
Order 1995 that a helicopter should not fly over a congested area of a city,
town or settlement below a height of 1500 feet (i.e. ~457m) above the highest
fixed object within 2000 feet (i.e. ~609m) of the helicopter.
4.10.2.9 The determination of assessment area
is based on the worst case scenario on flyover mode (i.e. Sikorsky S-92A), as
shown in Appendix 4.24. The proposed assessment area is
around 250m from both TCE and TCW, which is the minimum setback distance for
achieving the Lmax 85dB(A) noise criterion.
4.10.3
Prediction and Evaluation of Helicopter
Noise Impact
Scenarios
4.10.3.1
The helicopter noise impact assessment of the Project is conducted with
respect to the unmitigated scenario and mitigated scenario on the worst
operation mode (i.e. flyover mode with helicopter type Sikorsky S-92A for daytime period
and Super Puma AS332 L2 for evening and night time with maximum noise emission) representing the maximum noise
emission.
The operation modes have been confirmed with GFS, CAD and AAHK.
Prediction of Noise Impact
4.10.3.2
The predicted helicopter noise levels at the representative NSRs are
shown in table below. Details are provided in Appendix 4.25.
Table
4.53 Predicted helicopter noise impacts
No. [1] |
NAP [2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
Criteria Lmax, dB(A)[6] |
Max. Predicted Daytime Lmax,
dB(A) |
Max. Predicted Evening
time and Nighttime Lmax, dB(A) |
Exceedance |
N1 |
A1-2-01 |
R |
85 |
81 |
79 |
0 |
C2-2-02 |
R |
85 |
82 |
81 |
0 |
|
F1-1-03 |
R |
85 |
81 |
80 |
0 |
|
F2-2-02 |
R |
85 |
81 |
80 |
0 |
|
N2 |
TCV-1-06 |
R |
85 |
80 |
79 |
0 |
TCV-6-01 |
R |
85 |
81 |
80 |
0 |
Note:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which
rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise assessment point.
[3] The
first layer of NSRs within 130m horizontal to the flight path of helicopter is
included. Appendix 4.24 shows the assessment area determination.
[4] R – Residential Premises.
[5] Landuse according to the Recommended
Outline Development Plan (RODP).
4.10.3.3 The maximum predicted noise levels at concerned NSRs range from 79 – 81dB(A) as shown in Table 4.53. From the above table, all planned NSRs will be within daytime noise criteria of Lmax 85dB(A) and also below Lmax 85dB(A) during evening time and nighttime periods.
4.10.4
Mitigation of
Helicopter Noise Impact
4.10.4.1
All the business
helicopter and routine tasks by GFS will be operated during daytime period
only. Regarding the evening and nighttime uses, it will only involve emergency
uses including air ambulance, search & rescue, supporting law enforcement
agencies and fire fighting and there would not be any scheduled events during both evening and
night-time periods. Those emergency events would be either eastward or westward
depending on the destinations of the emergency events, are considered essential
and inevitable to serve the community.
4.10.4.2
While the predicted helicopter noise impacts
would comply with the statutory requirement, further considerations have been
taken into account to reduce any nuisance from helicopter noise, by making
reference to Annex 13 of the TM-EIAO, as summarized below:
4.10.4.3
The routes of the helicopter flyover events are constrained by a number
of factors relating to safety and operational requirements, especially for the
eastward route that would overpass TCE. Besides safety, the route shall also cater
for various destinations and operational requirements, including those
destinations at south of Lantau. The current route has therefore been
designated to optimize all these safety and operational requirements while
still complying the statutory requirements on helicopter noise
impacts.
4.10.4.4
The current urban design of TCE has adopted a
stepped height profile in a way that those residential lots with higher building height and development
density are strategically located to the southern part of the reclamation, and
those residential lots with lower building height and development density are
strategically located to the northern part of the reclamation where the
helicopters would fly across. Similar arrangements have been made for TCW
development. In other
words, for both TCE and TCW, more residential population has been located
further way from the influence of helicopter noise. Hence, the current urban design of TCE has
optimized the opportunities to achieve a more suitable landuse arrangement and
siting to address issue on helicopter noise as far as practicable.
4.10.4.5
The GFS
would replace the existing Super Puma AS332 L2 and EC 155 B1 to Airbus
Helicopter EC175 around Years 2017 to 2018. Since the EC175 would generate a
lower noise level than the Super Puma AS332 L2 and EC 155 B1 during flyover
events, once all the Super Puma AS332 L2 and EC155 B1 are replaced by EC175,
the maximum predicted noise levels by emergency events during evening and
night-time periods would also be reduced into a range of Lmax 74 –
76 dB(A). This would further improve the noise environment.
4.10.4.6
Helicopter noise
impacts for TCE and TCW are caused by flyover events which are at elevated levels above the buildings. Since noise measures including screening by noise tolerant
buildings, setback of buildings, decking over, extended podium, building
orientation, noise barrier/enclosure, special building design and architectural
festures/balcony, are primarily intended to
abate noise sources at low levels, it would not be effective to abate and reduce noise
from helicopter flyover operations. Besides, use of
open-textured road surfacing relates to road traffic noise control and is
not applicable to reduce the helicopter noise impact.
4.10.4.7
All practical measures have been
considered and evaluated. The noise did not exceed the noise standard laid down
in Annex 5 of the EIAO-TM. Hence indirect
mitigation measures are not recommended.
4.10.5
Evaluation of
Residual Helicopter Noise Impact
4.10.5.1 As discussed above, the maximum
predicted noise levels caused by emergency helicopter events during evening and
night-time periods would be in the range of Lmax 74 – 76 dB(A) after new helicopters are put in service. There would be anticipated on average 1 emergency event during
evening period and 1 emergency event during night-time period, and there
would not be any scheduled events during both evening and night-time periods. The duration of the
pass-by events is estimated to be approximately 5 – 10 seconds at various
residential lots. The noise did not exceed the standard laid down in Annex 5 of the
EIAO-TM.
4.10.5.2
The total number of dwellings, classrooms and other noise sensitive
elements that will be exposed to adverse residual noise impact exceeding the
criteria set in Annex 5 in the TM is nil.
4.11
Marine
Traffic Noise Impact Assessment
4.11.1 Marine Traffic Noise Impact Assessment Methodology
4.11.1.1
The prevailing noise measurement conducted
has included existing noise sources including those from marine traffic near
Tung Chung area, public pier in Tung Chung and piers in HKIA. Nevertheless, SEL
of the existing ferry commuting between Tuen Mun, public Pier in Tung Chung,
Sha Lo Wan and Tai O has also been measured. In addition, as the scale and
operation of the proposed marina is similar to that in Gold Coast Yacht Club
and Aberdeen Harbour, marine noise measurements have conducted at these two existing
marinas.
4.11.1.2
The following general procedures are
adopted for marine traffic noise assessment.
·
Determine the assessment area;
·
Identify and locate representative NSRs
that may be affected by the noise sources;
·
Determine the noise criteria for both
daytime and nighttime;
·
Obtain relevant information such as number
of marina vessels, speed of marina vessels, assumed route, marina layout, etc;
·
Determine the source level in accordance
with ISO 2922-1975(E);
·
Use standard acoustic principle for
attenuation as stated in the approved EIA report for Proposed Joint User Complex and Wholesale
Fish Market at Area 44, Tuen Mun (AEIAR-070/2003);
·
Calculate equivalent noise levels using
assumed information if available;
·
Cumulative impacts will be included.
4.11.1.3 A summary of equations adopted in
the marine traffic noise assessment is given in Appendix 4.26.
4.11.1.4
As there is no statutory requirement for
marine traffic noise, additional non-statutory noise criteria may therefore
need to be considered. An approach has been adopted similar to the approved EIA
report for the Proposed Joint User Complex and Wholesale Fish Market at Area
44, Tuen Mun (AEIAR-070/2003). It considered the predicted
noise level as unlikely to cause any disturbance and nuisance when it is below
the prevailing noise level.
4.11.1.5
The operational details for the existing
ferry and proposed marina are summarized in the table below.
Table 4.54 Operational details for the existing ferry and proposed marina
Operation Parameters |
Existing Ferry |
Proposed Marina |
Ferry / yacht per hour |
2[1] |
6[2] |
Speed knots/h |
16 |
5[3] |
Notes:
[1] According to operation schedule from operator and the
frequency has been confirmed by Transport Department.
[2] The frequency has been confirmed by Marine Department.
[3] According to Marine Department Notice No. 84, only speed at 5
knots per hour for yachts is allowed inside typhoon shelter. In addition, as
advised by the marine traffic engineer, the speed for the marine route as
indicated in Figure 4.1 is in 5 knots
per hour.
4.11.1.6
Measurements for marine noise source terms
have been conducted at Gold Coast for the proposed marina, and Tung Chung
Development Pier and Tai O Promenade for the existing ferry. The measurement location at Gold Coast was
about 50m from the vessels. For the
measurements at Tung Chung Pier and Tai O Promenade, the separation distance
was about 10 – 100m, depending on the transit route. The table below summarizes the marine noise
source term. Detail calculations are shown in Appendix 4.26a.
Table 4.55 Marine noise source term measurement
Location[1][4] |
Distance, m[2] |
Estimated Speed, knots/h |
Measured Lmax, dB(A) |
SEL, dB(A) [3] |
Gold Coast |
50 |
3 |
61.4 |
79.8 |
50 |
8 |
60.6 |
77.6 |
|
50 |
8 |
65.1 |
82.1 |
|
50 |
6 |
63.1 |
81.0 |
|
Tai O
Promenade |
20 |
16 |
63.6 |
69.5 |
20 |
16 |
57.2 |
63.1 |
|
10 |
16 |
74.7 |
74.6 |
|
10 |
16 |
71.5 |
71.4 |
|
10 |
16 |
80.9 |
80.8 |
Notes:
[1] Only non-disturbed events
have been tabulated in the above table. Detail calculation is shown in Appendix 4.26a.
[2] Estimated horizontal
distance from yacht to the measurement location.
[3] SEL at 25m at reference
speed of about 5knots/h for proposed yacht and 16knots/h for existing ferry.
[4] Marine noise measurement
was also conducted in Aberdeen. However, the measurement results are not shown
due to high background noise level.
4.11.2 Identification of Marine Traffic Noise Impact
Identification of
Assessment Area and Noise Sensitive Receivers
4.11.2.1 For operational marine traffic noise assessment, representative NSRs locations have been selected from Table 4.12 and are summarized in the table below and illustrated in Figure 4.13.
Table
4.56 Representative NSRs for marine traffic noise assessment
No.[1] |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses [4][5] |
No. of
Storey[5] |
Reference Location |
PNL [6] |
N1 |
D2-2-01 |
R |
18 |
PNM-1 |
59/59/53 |
E3-1-02 |
R |
18 |
|||
N2-1 |
TCRN-001 |
V |
2 |
PNM-9 |
58/56/51 |
Notes:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which
rely on opened windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise assessment point
[3] The first layer of NSRs within 300m from
Project boundary is included.
[4] R – Residential Premises
[5] Landuse and no. of storey according to the Recommended
Outline Development Plan (RODP).
[6] Prevailing noise levels refer to Table 4.11 and
locations refer to Figure 4.4. The PNL are
presented for [daytime / evening time / night-time].
4.11.2.2
The representative site
layouts for marine traffic noise assessment have been confirmed with Planning
Department and Lands Department.
Inventory of Noise Sources
4.11.2.3
Potential marine traffic noise impacts are
anticipated due to existing public ferry commuting between Tuen Mun, Tung Chung
and Tai O, and the proposed marina at TCE. The determination of assessment area
is given in Appendix 4.27. The proposed assessment area is approximately
190m for TCE and 480m for TCW respectively. The ferry route has been agreed with Transport
Department.
4.11.3
Prediction and Evaluation of Marine
Traffic Noise Impact
Scenarios
4.11.3.1
An unmitigated scenario on the worst operation mode representing the maximum noise emission is
conducted. The maximum number of marine traffic, and speed as advised by the
Transport Department and Marine Department have been adopted for worst
operation mode as shown in Table 4.54.
Where noise exceedances were identified, mitigated scenario would be made.
Prediction of Noise Impact
4.11.3.2
The predicted marine noise levels at the
representative NSRs are presented in the table below. The predicted marine noise levels are shown
in Appendix 4.28.
Table
4.57 Predicted marine traffic noise impacts
No.[1] |
NAP[2][3] |
Uses[4 ][5] |
PNL [6] |
Max Predicted Noise Levels, dB(A) [7] |
N1 |
D2-2-01 |
R |
59/59/53 |
46/44 |
E3-1-02 |
R |
48/44 |
||
N2-1 |
TCRN-001 |
V |
58/56/51 |
39/39 |
Note:
[1] The assessment will only include NSRs which rely on opened
windows for ventilation.
[2] NAP – Noise assessment point
[3] The first layer of NSRs within 300m from Project boundary is
included.
[4] R – Residential Premises
[5] Landuse according to the Recommended Outline Development Plan
(RODP).
[6] The prevailing noise levels are presented for [daytime / evening
/ night-time].
[7] Maximum predicted noise level is presented for [daytime and evening
time / night-time] period. Bold value
denotes non-compliance with TM-EIAO’s criteria.
4.11.3.3
From Table 4.57, the predicted marine noise
levels at all the representative NSRs will be well below the PNL. The total number of dwellings,
classrooms and other noise sensitive receivers that will be exposed to noise
impact exceeding the adopted criteria is nil.
4.11.3.4 As the noise emission from
existing ferry near TCW is generated from other project and operation of
existing marine traffic noise sources are outside scope of this project,
adverse noise impact for the Country Park near TCW is not anticipated. In addition, for the proposed marina, the
marine traffic route is separated with a large distance of about 1.2km and
screened by the planned development at TCE, adverse noise impact for the
Country Park near TCE is not anticipated.
4.11.4
Mitigation of
Marine Traffic Noise Impact
4.11.4.1
Based on the
latest information, all the NSRs within TCE and TCW will be within the
respective prevailing noise level. Hence, mitigation measures are not required.
4.11.5
Evaluation of Residual
Marine Traffic Noise Impact
4.11.5.1
Adverse residual noise impacts are therefore not anticipated. The total number of dwellings,
classrooms and other noise sensitive elements that will be exposed to adverse residual noise impact exceeding the adopted
criteria is nil.
4.12.1.1
Construction noise associated with the use of Powered
Mechanical Equipment
(PME) for different phases of construction has been conducted. With the
implementation of practical mitigation measures including good site management practices,
use of movable noise barrier and full enclosure, use of “quiet” plant and
working method, construction noise impacts at all of the neighboring
residential noise sensitive uses would be controlled to acceptable levels. For
educational institutions, the construction noise impacts during school normal
and examination periods would also comply with the relevant criteria.
4.12.1.2 Operational road traffic noise
impact on planned, existing and committed noise sensitive uses within TCE and
TCW have been predicted for the assessment year. Results indicate that the
noise impacts can be mitigated by a combination of noise mitigation measures including
1) noise barriers along some road sections or boundary walls within development
sites; 2) application of low noise road surfacing materials on some road
sections; and 3) suitable treatment on end walls, arranging noise
tolerant portions of buildings in internal layout design and architectural fins
in some buildings to within the respective noise criteria. These mitigation
will also ensure that the noise levels caused by project road are within the
respective noise criteria.
4.12.1.3 However, there is scope for adoption of alternative noise mitigation
measures, for example, by means of alternative layout and design of individual
developments at detailed design stage. Besides, possibility of use of new road
surfacing material with considerable traffic noise reduction capability may be
explored when test results on its application in Hong Kong are available. An
environmental review may be conducted in due course to study how the use of new
road surfacing material could help reduce traffic noise impacts and minimise
the scale/extent of the proposed noise mitigation measures.
4.12.1.4 Besides, as discussed in Section 4.5.2, the assessment has based on the timely implementation of the noise non-sensitive building to the north of NLH / existing railway. This arrangement has been agreed with Planning Department and Lands Department.
4.12.1.5
Fixed noise assessment has been conducted. Noise impact from planned fixed plant could
be effectively mitigated by implementing noise control measure at source during
the detailed design stage. With the adoption of the proposed maximum
permissible SWLs for the proposed fixed plant, the impact noise levels at
representative NSRs complies with the relevant noise criteria. Therefore,
adverse fixed noise sources impact to the NSRs is not anticipated.
4.12.1.6
According to the approved 3RS
EIA findings, the predicted NEF 25 contours of the 3RS would be away from TCE
upon the full commissioning of the 3RS. Nevertheless, appropriate development
phasing for TCE will also be considered to ensure all the NSRs within TCE and TCW will be outside the NEF 25 noise contours
during the time of population intake.
4.12.1.7
Rail noise assessment
has been conducted based on rail noise source measurement and operational
information from the railway operator. Results indicate that the noise impacts
on NSRs would comply with the statutory requirement with the provision of semi
enclosures, facade with no openable windows and architectural fins. It should be noted that the
realignment of TCL and Railway Stations at TCE and TCW and its associated
railway system is a separate Designated Project under Item A.2 of Schedule 2 of
TM-EIAO. A separate EIA study will be therefore conducted by the railway
operator to fulfil all the statutory requirements and procedures under the
EIAO. Hence, the proposed mitigation measures in Section 4.8.4 are tentative for cumulative assessment purpose in
this EIA and all the mitigation measures will be revised by the railway
operator during their Schedule 2 EIA.
4.12.1.8
There will be a
proposed alignment running underground between Railway Stations at TCE and TCW and
its associated railway system. Groundborne noise assessment results indicate
that the groundborne noise impacts on planned NSRs would comply with the
statutory requirement and hence mitigation measure is not required. As the proposed Railway Stations at TCE and TCW and its associated railway system is a separate Designated Project under Item
A.2 of Schedule 2 of TM-EIAO, a separate study would be conducted by the rail
operator to fulfil all the statutory requirements and procedures under the EIAO.
4.12.1.9 Helicopter noise impact on planned
sensitive uses within TCE and TCW have been predicted. According to the latest
information, the flight path of helicopters would maintain sufficient
separation distance from noise sensitive receivers in TCE and TCW. Consideration
for measures have also been taken into account as discussed in Section 4.10.4 and 4.10.5. The noise impact on NSRs at TCE and TCW would comply with
the statutory requirement
4.12.1.10
An assessment has
been conducted for marine traffic noise based on measurement data. Results indicate that the noise impacts on
NSRs would be well below the prevailing noise level and hence adverse noise
impact is not anticipated.