1.1.1
As Hong Kong
people become more and more passionate about sports and our athletes have been
making encouraging achievements in recent years in the international arena, we see
a strong demand for new major sports venues in Hong Kong. At present, our major
event venues including the Hong Kong Stadium, the Hong Kong Coliseum, and the
Queen Elizabeth Stadium are all over 20 years old. These facilities have stood
the test of time, but are unable to fully meet the modern day demands of
athletes, spectators and the wider community. In addition, a shortfall of
indoor sports centres and public sports grounds in East Kowloon is anticipated
based on population projection. In 2006, the Hong Kong SAR Government proposed
the development of a multi-purpose sports complex at Kai Tak with the strong
support from sports communities and local communities including district
councils. It is anticipated that the Kai Tak Multi-purpose Sports Complex (MPSC or the
Project) will provide high-quality sports facilities that will help to
alleviate Hong Kong’s shortage of public sports facilities and will also
provide new venues suitable for hosting major local and international sports
events.
1.1.2
A Comprehensive
Planning and Engineering Review of South East Kowloon Development was commenced in 2004 and a Preliminary
Outline Development Plan (PODP) was first prepared as part of Kai
Tak Planning Review (KTPR) by the Planning Department. In 2007, the Civil
Engineering and Development Department commissioned the “Kai Tak Development
Engineering Study” including a Schedule 3 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
study “Kai Tak Development” (KTD), to confirm the feasibility of the proposed
development as recommended in the PODP. The KTD EIA
was prepared as part of the engineering study and approved under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) (Cap. 499) on 4 March 2009. The Project is one of the
key components in the PODP.
1.1.3
The potential
environmental impacts of the Project have been broadly addressed in the
Schedule 3 EIA report for the KTD. The approved EIA report for the KTD recommended that a further EIA
study is required under the EIAO to address the environmental impacts of the
Project in detail given that the Project has been
identified as a designated project under the
following sub-items of Part I, Schedule 2 of the EIAO:
·
The Main Stadium of the
Project under item O.6 “An open air concert venue with a capacity to
accommodate more than 10 000 persons”
·
The Main Stadium of the
Project under item O.7 “An outdoor sporting facility with a capacity to
accommodate more than 10 000 persons”
1.1.4
A project profile
(No. PP-509/2014) was submitted
to the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) on 3 June 2014 and an EIA Study Brief (No. ESB-274/2014) specifying the scope of the required
environmental impact assessment was issued by EPD on 16 July 2014.
1.1.5
Subsequently, an
EIA study for the MPSC was started in July 2014. The purpose of the EIA study was to
provide information on the nature and extent of environmental impacts arising
from the construction and operation of the Project and associated works that
will take place concurrently. This information will contribute to decisions by
the Director of Environmental Protection on:
·
the overall
acceptability of any adverse environmental consequences that are likely to
arise as a result of the Project;
·
the conditions and
requirements for the detailed design, construction and operation of the Project
to mitigate against adverse environmental consequences wherever practicable;
and
·
the acceptability
of residual impacts after the proposed mitigation measures are implemented.
1.2.1
The purpose of
this EIA Executive Summary (ES) is to present a summary of the findings,
conclusions and recommendations of the EIA report. This ES contains the
following information:
·
Section 2 presents
purpose and nature of the Project, consideration of alternative development options and construction
methods for the Project;
·
Section 3 presents
the key findings of the environmental impact assessment;
·
Section 4
describes the proposed environmental monitoring and audit for the Project; and
·
Section 5 presents the conclusions.
2.1.1
The project site covers
a land area of about 28.2 hectares (ha) situated in the North Apron Area of the former Kai Tak Airport. It is
bounded by the Central Kowloon Route to the south and dissected by
Road D2 (Shing Kai Road) in the middle. The scope of the Project includes a
multi-purpose complex comprising a 50,000-seat Main Stadium, a Public Sports
Ground, an Indoor Sports Centre, and other ancillary/supporting facilities such
as car parks, retail, food and beverage outlets, a office building and a hotel. The Main Stadium shall be multi-functional to meet the requirements of different events, while optimizing utilisation and delivering a good spectator experience. While priority
will be given to major sports events, non-sporting events such as concerts, exhibitions, carnivals, etc. may also be held in the Main Stadium. An indicative master layout plan of the Project is shown
in Figure A.
2.2.1
The Multi-purpose
Sports Complex (MPSC) at Kai Tak is the most important Hong Kong sports
infrastructure project of recent decades and the sports park will be the
largest in Hong Kong. It will provide multi-purpose sports venues that will
allow the hosting of major international sports events and provide our athletes
with more opportunities to compete at a home venue with players from other
parts of the world. It will also provide many facilities for professional and
amateur athletes as well as members of the public to enjoy.
2.2.2
Without this
Project, the site will remain as a large piece of construction site and temporary car parks until alternative planning uses are implemented. Not only is the
view unpleasant, the exposed ground is susceptible to soil erosion. The current
land uses are also incompatible with the future surrounding development, not to
mention that the demand for sports and recreation facility remains unmet. In
this sense, the Project would meet community needs for sports facilities,
provide advanced and multi-purpose sports venues for hosting high-level
competitions, and contribute further to the sports development of Hong Kong,
i.e. to promote sport in the community, to support elite sport and to make Hong
Kong a centre for major international sports events. Upon completion of the MPSC, the landscaped area will be grown with
vegetation that will help preventing soil erosion and enhancing the
landscape and visual quality of the area, and most importantly will provide generous parklands for the public to
relax and enjoy outdoor activities. The design of the MPSC will be coherent
with the surrounding KTD Area in the future. The Main Stadium will also serve as a landmark facility in the Project.
2.3.1
In order to fulfil
the requirement for international sports events, the Main Stadium will be
accompanied by a range of supporting facilities that will create a critical mass of
development for producing a dynamic and vibrant sports environment. The Home
Affairs Bureau had carried out the “Study on Requirements for Major New Sports and
Recreation Venues” in 2001 and the findings of the study were updated in 2005.
The 2001 study identified and examined 8 candidate sites that might best
accommodate such a sports complex. It included Northshore Lantau, West Kowloon
Reclamation, Tseung Kwan O, Kai Tak Development (KTD), Mei Foo, Tuen Mun, Victoria Park and Pak Shek Kok
and concluded that the site inside the KTD is the most suitable for the stadium development. The site is readily available (no reclamation or extensive demolition is required), large enough for mega-scale
sports facilities, will be well-served by public mass transport, and that
dispersal routes can be designed to direct spectators to the public transport.
The planning of the stadium had been incorporated since the KTPR. For example, the layout of the site
has been laid down such that the Main Stadium is located by the waterfront and
the orientation of the spectator stand of the Public Sports Ground has been
designed to minimize noise impact on future residents in the neighbourhood.
2.3.2
After considering
all the key factors including environmental factors in the option selection,
the proposed multi-purpose sports complex in the KTD is the preferred option to avoid or minimize adverse
environmental impacts to the largest practicable extent.
2.4.1
The proposed
construction sequence is based on conventional bottom up construction starting
from site clearance, site formation, foundation, superstructure, Mechanical and Electrical (M&E) plants installation, utilities, finishes and external
works. As the project site covers approximately 28.2 ha, a pragmatic,
economical and environmentally friendly way is to carry out construction works in geographical zones in order to
minimize concurrent construction works in different zones as far as
practicable. The sewerage connection and construction material/waste delivery
routes are designated to ensure a smooth interface with the construction of Road D2.
2.4.2
Prefabricated
construction method should be adopted as far as practicable to minimise
construction waste and noise and dust impacts. The prefabricated
construction method recommended in the EIA Report should be implemented as
contract requirements. Marine access is planned
for delivery of prefabricated units direct to the site.
2.5.1
The construction
works of the Project are scheduled to commence in 2017 for completion in
2020/2021.
2.6.1
Based on the
latest available information, the following projects are likely to have interactions with this Project. The cumulative
environmental impacts arising from these concurrent projects during the
construction and operation phases of the Project have been assessed in the EIA
Report.
Table 2-1 List of Concurrent Projects
|
No. |
Project |
Time
Line |
|
1 |
East
Portion of Central Kowloon Route (CKR) |
Scheduled
for completion in 2021 but according to the latest available information,
the CKR would not be commissioned before 2023 |
|
2 |
Reconstruction
and Upgrading of Kai Tak Nullah |
Scheduled
for completion in April 2018 |
|
3 |
Kai
Tak Development Stage 4 (D2 road construction) |
Scheduled
for completion in 3rd quarter of 2017 |
|
4 |
North
Apron Remaining Infrastructure |
Scheduled
for completion in late of 2021 |
|
5 |
Kai
Tak Approach Channel and Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter Improvement Works (Phase
2) |
Scheduled
for completion in December 2018 |
|
6 |
Shatin
Central Link (SCL) |
Scheduled
for completion in 2019 due to the project delay |
Key Assessment Scope and Key Criteria
3.1.1
The air quality
impact assessment was conducted following the technical requirements given in
Appendix A of the EIA Study Brief. In accordance with Section 3.4.3 of the EIA
Study Brief, the Study Area is defined by a distance of 500m from the boundary
of the project site, with consideration to be extended to include major
existing, planned and committed air pollutant emission sources that may have a
bearing on the environmental acceptability the Project. The criteria and
guidelines for evaluating and assessing air quality impact is stated in Section 1 of Annex 4 and Annex 12 of the Technical
Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM).
Construction Phase
3.1.2
The Project is
planned to commence construction in 2017 for completion by 2020/2021. Potential
air quality impacts from the construction works of the Project would mainly
arise from construction dust from site clearance, excavation, foundation and
site formation works. Construction dust impact arising from this Project with
consideration of concurrent projects has been assessed.
3.1.3
In order to reduce
the dust emissions from the Project for compliance with the Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) and Air Quality Objectives (AQOs) criteria at air sensitive receivers (ASRs), the following specific mitigation measures are
recommended:
·
Regular watering of the construction site;
·
Adopting dust
control measures stipulated in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust)
Regulation and good site practice; and
·
Proper handling of
exposed earth.
3.1.4
With proper
implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, the assessment
results indicated that dust concentrations at all identified ASRs are predicted
to comply with the 1-hour TSP criterion stipulated in the EIAO-TM, as well as the AQOs for the daily average and
annual average Respirable Suspended Particulates (RSP) and Fine Suspended Particulates
(FSP). Hence, adverse residual air quality impacts during the construction
phase of the Project would be avoided.
Operation Phase
3.1.5
The Project itself is not
an air pollution source. During the
operational phase, the only air emission source due to the Project is the
induced traffic along the traffic routes leading to or from the future MPSC. Nitrogen dioxide (NO2),
RSP, and FSP are the key criteria pollutants for assessment of the air quality
impact in this Project according to the AQOs. Apart from the
vehicular emission sources, industrial chimneys and ventilation
buildings within 1 km from the boundary of project site, as
well as the emissions from To Kwa Wan Typhoon Shelter and Kai Tak Cruise Terminal are also emission sources for the
assessment. Therefore, the AQOs for 1-hr NO2, annual NO2,
24-hr FSP, annual FSP, 24-hr RSP and annual RSP have been identified as key assessment criteria. Although the Project is unlikely to contribute a significant amount of sulphur dioxide (SO2)
to the environment, the SO2 from industrial chimneys, the typhoon shelter and the cruise terminal may have an
impact on the Project. Therefore, the AQOs for 10-min and 24-hr SO2 have also been identified as assessment criteria.
3.1.6
Cumulative air quality
impact for both “Without Project” and “With Project” scenarios have been assessed. Based on the modelling results, it is
predicted that the cumulative 10-minute SO2, hourly SO2, daily average RSP, annual average RSP, daily average FSP, annual average FSP, and hourly NO2
concentration at all the identified ASRs would comply with the relevant AQOs for both scenarios.
3.1.7
Exceedance of the
annual average NO2 criterion has been identified at some selected
ASRs in localized areas along major roads such as Prince Edward Road East
and Kowloon City Road (near the Kai Tak Tunnel West Portal). The AQO exceedance of the annual NO2
under the “With Project” scenario is dominated by the background
air pollution level.
3.1.8
Various options of
mitigation measures have been explored. Practical measures to be implemented include:
(a) provision of electric vehicle (EV) charging facilities in at least one-third of the car parking spaces for private cars, (b) provision of EV
charging enabling facilities in all car parking spaces for private cars, (c)
giving priority to EV using the car parking spaces as far as practicable, (d)
use of electric saloon cars and coaches in the transport services for staffs
and/or hotel guests under normal operation (if such services are provided by
the future operator), and (e) restricted entry of heavy vehicles during peak
hours (7 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. to 7 p.m.) in weekdays, except for major
events (i.e. with more than 20,000 persons).
3.1.9
The mitigation
measures recommended above would help reduce the annual NO2 emission
but their benefits are not easily quantifiable for the purpose of evaluating
the residual impact. As such, the residual impacts are evaluated based upon the
assessment results which would potentially be further reduced when the future
operator puts in place the mitigation measures as far as practicable during the
project implementation stage.
3.1.10
The highest
predicted annual NO2 concentration at the identified ASRs
(representing shops at Kam Wah Building near Ma Tau Chung Road) is 64.4 µg/m3
in Year 2023, which will be reduced to 46.6 µg/m3 in Year 2036. The
exceedances are largely due to the background air pollution level, and the
contribution from the Project is only 0.19 µg/m3 (i.e. 0.5% of the
AQO limit) at the identified ASR in Year 2036. The staffs working at the shops
would at most work for 12 hours a day and 6 days a week, and therefore they
would have limited exposure to this level of NO2. On this basis, the
magnitude of contribution to the cumulative annual NO2 concentration
due to the Project when considered in conjunction with the impacts from
prevailing background and other potential projects in Year 2036 is considered
minimal, and therefore the potential associated health effect from the minimal
additional air pollutants caused by the Project itself is considered negligible
and unlikely to be a key concern.
3.1.11
With the
implementation of the air quality improvement programmes currently being
undertaken by the Government, such as “A Clean Air Plan for Hong Kong” which
aims to tackle roadside air pollution and to reduce marine emissions,
continuous air quality improvement in the territory is expected. Based on these
assessment results, the predicted magnitude of annual NO2
concentrations at all the representative ASRs will be reduced from the worst
assessment year of Year 2023 to Year 2036 (15 years after the Project
commencement). Furthermore, the number of ASRs being exposed to NO2
levels exceeding the annual criteria will be largely reduced from 15 to 5 from
Year 2023 to Year 2036. As demonstrated by the improvement trend of air quality
conditions, the air quality impact arising from the Project will be off-set in
the longer term by the Government’s air quality improvement programme. The
likelihood of future adverse environmental impacts caused by the operation of
the Project itself is not high.
3.1.12
The exceedance
zones for annual NO2 in Year 2023 and Year 2036 are localised. The
affected areas and hence the likely size of community affected are not
widespread. As seen from the Year 2023 and Year 2036 contour plots for annual
NO2, increases in the exceedance zones due to the contribution from
the Project in both assessment years are unnoticeable. Based on the assessment
results, similar population would be affected without the Project. The affected
communities mainly consist of the staffs in the shops at ground floor, who have
limited exposure to the NO2 impact. As air quality improves over
time, the small affected population in Year 2023 will be further reduced to a
limited size in Year 2036.
3.1.13
The non-compliance
of annual NO2 AQO criterion occurs only in some localised areas
which are considered not of regional concern. In addition, the residual impact
would not cause any ecological or cultural heritage concerns.
3.1.14
Pollutant
concentrations predicted by PATH in Year 2020 have been adopted for the background air quality for the
assessment years from Year 2023 (the worst assessment year) to Year 2036 (15
years after the commencement of the Project). In consideration of air quality
improvement schemes implemented by the Government that would gradually take
effect following Year 2020, the use of the Year 2020 PATH background in
predicting pollutant concentration in Years 2023 to 2036 is considered
conservative. As such, both the likelihood and degree of uncertainty of adverse
environmental impacts are minimized.
3.1.15
Based on the
above, it is clearly demonstrated that the residual impact of annual NO2
is predominantly caused by existing background concentrations unrelated to this
Project, and the impacts caused by this Project itself are minimal. It is thus concluded that the residual air
quality impact caused by the Project will not cause long term serious
environmental implications.
Key Assessment Scope and Key Criteria
3.2.1
According
to Clause 3.4.4 of the EIA Study Brief, relevant hazard to life assessment findings related to the Project should
be reviewed in order to determine whether an updated hazard to life assessment
in the EIA study is necessary. If an updated hazard to life assessment is required
to be carried out, technical assessment requirement stipulated in Clauses
3.4.4.2 to 3.4.4.4 of the EIA Study Brief should be followed. The criteria for
evaluating hazard to life are stated in Section 2 of Annex 4 of the EIAO-TM.
Construction & Operational Phase
3.2.2
The
potential hazard to life impact in the KTD area, which covers the MPSC, has
been fully assessed in the approved Schedule 3 EIA Report for the KTD (Register
No.: AEIAR-130/2009). The approved EIA Report for the KTD concluded that no adverse
hazard to life impact on the future occupants of the KTD is anticipated. Based
on the latest available information, no new potentially hazardous installation
(PHI) is proposed in the KTD area, and all existing/planned hazardous sources
within or in vicinity of KTD were considered in the approved EIA Report for the
KTD. Based on the Consultation Zones (CZ) or study areas (SA) adopted in the
approved EIA for different types of hazardous sources, the project site falls
outside all the CZ/SA of the identified hazardous sources. Hence, the findings
of the hazard to life assessment related to the Project in the approved EIA
report for the KTD remain valid, i.e. adverse potential hazard to life impact
arising from the construction and operation of the Project is not anticipated,
and no further hazard to life assessment is required.
Key Assessment Scope and Key Criteria
3.3.1
Noise
Impact Assessment (NIA) for construction and operational phases of the Project
was conducted in accordance with Section 3.4.5 and Appendix C of the EIA Study
Brief. For evaluating and assessing noise impact, the criteria and guidelines
as stated in Annexes 5 and 13 of the EIAO-TM have been followed. As per the
requirements in EIA Study Brief Section 3.4.5, the Study Area for NIA included
areas within 300 m from the boundary of the project site. According to the EIA
Study Brief, the study area shall be expanded to include NSRs at distances over
300 metres from the Project boundary and associated works if those NSRs are
also affected by the construction and operation of the Project.
Construction Phase
3.3.2
The
predicted unmitigated cumulative construction noise would be 75 – 83 dB(A) at
the representative noise sensitive receivers (NSRs). With the implementation of
practicable mitigation measures such as the adoption of quiet powered
mechanical equipment (PME) and movable noise barriers, the mitigated
construction noise from the Project at all the NSRs would comply with the 75
dB(A) criterion. The cumulative construction noise impact would exceed the
criterion at 3 representative NSRs (two planned residential sites and one
planned Comprehensive Development Area (CDA) site) but the exceedance would
mainly be caused by other concurrent projects and transient in nature. Hence,
adverse residual construction noise impact is not anticipated.
Operation Phase
Traffic Noise
Impact arising from Traffic Induced by the Project
3.3.3
During
the operational phase of the Project, the potential traffic noise impact on the
surrounding NSRs caused by the traffic induced by the Project has been
predicted and evaluated. The assessment results indicated that except for some
planned NSRs including a public housing site and a CDA zone along Sung Wong Toi
Road, insignificant additional traffic noise impact would be caused by the
traffic induced by the Project or the overall traffic noise levels would comply
with the noise criterion of 70 dB(A) for dwellings.
3.3.4
For
the planned NSRs where a significant additional traffic noise impact caused by the
Project is anticipated, it has been shown that the potential traffic noise
impact caused by the Project would not create unacceptable constraints to the
proposed development, whilst the future developers of these development sites
would carry out environmental assessments (EA) for the proposed developments at
the detailed design stage. The EA would include the required mitigation
measures for traffic noise impact in order to ensure that all NSRs at the
subject sites would not be exposed to road traffic noise levels above the noise
criteria as stipulated in the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines
(HKPSG).
Noise from Sports
Events from Main Stadium and Public Sports Ground
3.3.5
Acoustic
features will be adopted in the design of the Main Stadium and the Public
Sports Ground to control the potential noise impacts arising from sports
events. For the Main Stadium, the structure and fixed roof of the stadium will
be soundproofing and complete. To increase the soundproofing performance of the
roof, acoustic panels will be attached underneath the fixed roof of the Main
Stadium. The entrances of the Main Stadium will also be equipped with double
acoustic doors. A distributed public address system will be adopted with the
loudspeakers directed towards the spectator stand. A retractable roof, which forms part of the
design of the Main Stadium, will be closed when needed. Rubber bearing or other
devices with similar function will be used to avoid noise leakage between the
fixed roof and the retractable roof.
3.3.6
As
for the Public Sports Ground, a cover will be built over the spectator stand.
To increase the soundproofing performance of the cover, sound absorption panels
will be attached underneath the entire cover.
3.3.7
For
sports events in the Main Stadium, the predicted operation noise levels at
receivers during daytime/evening time period (i.e. 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.) are
within the relevant noise criteria even with the retractable roof fully opened.
Adverse noise impact arising from sports events in the Main Stadium is not anticipated.
3.3.8
For
sports events in the Public Sports Ground, no adverse noise impact on NSRs is
anticipated as the noise levels would comply with the relevant noise criteria
for sports events during daytime/evening time period.
3.3.9
According
to the proposed mode of operation, no organized events would be held
concurrently in the Main Stadium and the Public Sports Ground. Nonetheless, the
public is free to use the venues when there is no organized event. If an
organized event is being held at the Main Stadium, community activities such as
jogging, training, amateur ball games, and activities supporting the organized
event (excluding rehearsal for a music event) in the Main Stadium such as warm
up, hospitality, etc. may be held at the Public Sports Ground, and vice versa.
Noise from such community activities would be insignificant. Hence, no
excessive cumulative noise impact arising from the events from the Main Stadium
and the Public Sports Ground is anticipated. In addition, no night-time events
(i.e. 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. of the next day) will be
held in the Main Stadium nor the Public Sports Ground.
Noise from Fixed
Plant
3.3.10 With the implementation of the recommended
mitigation measures such as enclosures and silencers, the mitigated noise
levels from fixed plant sources such as the building services system operation
are found to comply with the noise criterion at the worst-affected receivers.
The cumulative noise levels due to the noise from sports events in the Main
Stadium, noise from sports events in the Public Sports Ground and all the
mitigated noise from the fixed plant are found to comply with the noise
criteria at all NSRs.
Noise from Music, Singing and Instrument
Performing Activities
3.3.11 With the implementation of the recommended
mitigation measures set out in Section 3.3.5
above, the potential noise impact arising from the music events at the Main
Stadium during daytime/evening period (i.e. 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.) would comply
with the noise criteria stipulated under the “Noise Control Guidelines for Music,
Singing and Instrument Performing Activities” (the Noise Control Guidelines).
Should the future operator plan to implement any music events at the Main
Stadium during night-time period (i.e. 11 p.m. to 7 a.m.), the operator is
obliged to ensure that the noise impacts arising from the said night-time music
events will comply with the requirements under the Noise Control Ordinance.
Human Noise during Crowd Dispersion
3.3.12 Noise from human activities in public places would
arise mainly from crowd dispersal after events. Noise in public places is
controlled under the NCO. Any person causes any noise which is a source of
annoyance to any person commits an offence. Annoyance means that the noise is
intolerable and should not be present from a reasonable person’s point of view.
In general, crowd dispersion is not a source of annoyance especially during
daytime/evening. Since events held in the Main Stadium may require crowd
dispersal after 11:00 p.m., local events with comparable crowd dispersal nature
and scale have been reviewed to assess the possible annoyance from human
activities including crowd dispersion during night-time. The assessment has
concluded that human noise during dispersion of crowd in public places in
night-time would not cause annoyance to local residents. Nevertheless,
preventive measures have been adopted for addressing the potential human noise
impact.
3.3.13 The crowd from the Main Stadium may disperse on
the podium level during daytime/evening. It is recommended that for dispersion
after 10:30 p.m. the crowd after leaving the Main Stadium should be directed to
the ground level of MPSC instead of on the podium level in order to minimize
the exposed sections of the dispersal routes. Crowd management measures should
be adopted for major events (i.e. with more than 20,000 persons) which finish
at or later than 10:30 p.m. The future operator should arrange its staff to
marshal the dispersion of crowds after 10:30 p.m. in an orderly manner from the
exits of the Main Stadium all the way to the two nearby MTR stations. Placards
should be used to remind attendees of the events to keep the noise down. No
loudspeakers should be used by the marshalling staff. No adverse potential
noise impact arising from crowd dispersion within the Project site is expected.
Noise Monitoring
3.3.14 Noise monitoring is required for music events held
in the Main Stadium during day time or evening time periods for the first 3
years of operation. After the 3-year monitoring period, a review of the
findings of the monitoring will be conducted to determine whether further
monitoring will be required.
Key Assessment Scope and Key Criteria
3.4.1
Water Quality
Impact Assessment (WQIA) for construction and operational phases of this
Project was conducted in accordance with Section 3.4.6 and Appendix D1 of the
EIA Study Brief. In general, the WQIA followed the requirements as
stated in Water Pollution Control Ordinance (WPCO), Appendix D1 of the EIA
Study Brief, Annex 6 and Annex 14 of the EIAO-TM and other relevant standards
and guidelines. As per the requirements in EIA Study Brief Section 3.4.6, the
Study Area for WQIA included areas within 500 m from the boundary of the
Project site and Victoria Harbour (Phase 1 and Phase 2) Water Control Zone
under WPCO.
Construction Phase
3.4.2
During the construction
phase, potential water quality impact may arise from site run-off, sewage from
workforce, accidental spillage of chemicals, and discharge of wastewater from
various construction activities. With the implementation of the recommended
mitigation measures including those stipulated in the EPD’s Practice Note for Professional Persons,
Construction Site Drainage (ProPECC PN1/94), no adverse water quality impact on
the water sensitive receivers from the construction works for the Project is anticipated.
Examples include covering stockpile with tarpaulin; installation of perimeter
channels for interception of surface runoff generated from works area;
treatment of silty water up to the requirements stipulated in the discharge
license before discharging; provision of adequate toilet facilities to workers
and regular maintenance of the
facilities by a licensed waste collector; and locating service shop and
maintaining facilities on hard standing within a bounded area to prevent
seepage of leaked chemical into soil.
Operational Phase
3.4.3
During the
operational phase, surface runoff from the Main Stadium and the Public Sports
Ground may be contaminated by the residual fertilizers and pesticides from the
maintenance of the natural turf. Mitigation measures have been proposed such as
the adoption of artificial turf or hard surface as the default playing surface,
which involve no pesticides nor fertilizers. If natural turf is used as the
default playing surface, the use and application of fertilizers and pesticides will follow the normal practices according to the Leisure and Cultural
Services Department’s (LCSD) prevailing code of practice and the Pesticides
Ordinance (Cap. 133). A staged
intercepting system will be developed for storage of surface water for reuse
and a Stormwater Re-use Management Plan will be prepared and implemented, so as to ensure no
residual fertilizers and pesticides from the turf surface run-off are
discharged. Hence, with the implementation of the recommended mitigation
measures, the operation of the Project will unlikely result in unacceptable
stormwater discharge problem.
Key Assessment Scope and Key Criteria
3.5.1
Assessment of the
Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Implications (S&STI) was conducted according
to Section 3.4.7 and Appendix D2 of the EIA Study Brief. The sewage and
sewerage assessment follows the criteria and guidelines for evaluating and
assessing impacts on the public sewerage, sewage treatment and disposal
facilities as stated in Section 6.5 of Annex 14 of the EIAO-TM.
Construction Phase
3.5.2
During the construction
phase, the Project will not impact on the existing sewerage system.
Operational Phase
3.5.3
Sewage generated
from the Project will be collected at the To Kwa Wan Preliminary Treatment
Works (TKWPTW) and subsequently delivered to Stonecutters Island Sewage
Treatment Works via deep tunnels for further treatment and disposal. The amount
of sewage generated by visitors, spectators, permanent and temporary employee
of all facilities in MPSC was estimated as per EPD Guidelines for Estimating
Sewage Flows for Sewage Infrastructure Planning (GESF) (2005). Since the
capacity of the current design capacity of the TKWPTW will be adequate to cater
for the increased flow due to the Project, no additional sewerage treatment
facilities are required.
3.5.4
Two new sewerages will be built to collect sewage generated
from the Project and discharge into the downstream sewers, which will be
subsequently discharged into the nearby sewage pumping stations for further
disposal.
Key Assessment Scope and Key Criteria
3.6.1
Assessment on Waste Management Implications (WMI) was conducted according
to Section 3.4.8 and Appendix E1 of the EIA Study Brief. The criteria and guidelines for assessing waste management implications
are set out in Annex 7 and Annex 15 of the EIAO-TM respectively and other relevant standards and guidelines.
Construction Phase
3.6.2
Construction and demolition (C&D) materials would be generated from
the site formation and various civil works for the foundation, sub-structure and superstructure construction. The C&D materials would comprise both inert (e.g. soil, broken rock, broken concrete and
building debris etc.) and non-inert (e.g. bamboo, timber and packaging waste)
materials. The total volume of C&D materials generated from the
construction activities of the Project is estimated to be approximately 657,519
m3. Of these, about 141,945 m3 (21%) of the inert C&D
materials would be reused on-site and about 447,464 m3 (69%) of
inert C&D materials would be delivered to the public fill reception
facilities for subsequent reuse. The remaining 68,110 m3 (10%) of
non-inert C&D materials would be disposed of at the landfill. Use of an existing barging point with direct
access to the Project site can minimize the use of public roads for disposal of
C&D materials. There
is no sediment present requiring marine disposal.
Operational
Phase
3.6.4
It is expected that general refuse would be generated during the
operational phase of the Project. The total general refuse generated from the
sporting facilities, hotel, office and retail uses is estimated to be about 35
tonnes per day.
3.6.5
The spectators will be encouraged to minimize unnecessary waste
generation by means of promotion materials and announcements. Sufficient
recycling containers will also be provided at suitable locations to encourage
recycling of waste such as aluminium cans, plastics and waste paper. The refuse
will be disposed of at approved waste transfer or disposal facilities by refuse
collection vehicles. As such, adverse solid waste impacts are not expected.
Key Assessment Scope and Key Criteria
3.7.1
According to EIA
Study Brief Section 3.4.9 and Appendix E2, the environmental impact due to land
contamination within and at the vicinity of the Study Area was assessed. The criteria and
guidelines for evaluating and assessing the land contamination impact stated in
Sections 3.1 and 3.2 of Annex 19 of the EIAO-TM were followed.
Construction Phase
3.7.2
The land
contamination issues in the Project site have been reviewed and assessed.
Basically, any land contamination identified in the North Apron of
the former Kai Tak Airport has been cleaned up and the site is considered fit for the intended use.
Operational Phase
3.7.3
There will be no
future use with potential land contamination risk in the Project site.
Key Assessment Scope and Key Criteria
3.8.1
Ecological impact
assessment was conducted in accordance with Section 3.4.10 and Appendix F of
the EIA Study Brief and EIAO-TM Annexes 8 and 16. Habitat evaluation
and impact assessment followed the requirements stated in EIAO Guidance Notes
6/2010, 7/2010, 10/2010 and other relevant legislations and guidelines.
According to Section 3.4.10 of the EIA Study Brief and EIAO-TM Annex 16, the Study Area covers 500m from the site
boundary.
Construction & Operational Phases
3.8.2
No site of
conservation importance was identified in the Study Area. About 16.1 ha of
construction sites, 5.0 ha of developed area and 6.9 ha of abandoned area in
the project site will be lost. These habitats have only very low ecological
value. Although 2 nos. of avifauna species of conservation importance and 1
uncommon avifauna species were recorded in the Project footprint, only minor
impact is expected as no nursery ground, breeding, foraging or roosting
behaviour was recorded in the project footprint. Nevertheless, no site, flora
or other fauna species of conservation importance would be impacted directly.
3.8.3
Surrounding habitats and their communities may be subject to indirect impacts such as water contamination, noise, dust, and/or glare induced by construction
and operation activities. Nevertheless,
with proper implementation of water quality, noise, dust and glare mitigation
measures, all indirect impacts in construction and operational phases would be acceptable as they would be
insignificant or minor.
3.8.4
With proper
implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, residual impact is
considered acceptable. The overall impact on terrestrial ecology is considered
as acceptable.
Key Assessment Scope and Key Criteria
3.9.1
The Landscape
and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) was prepared in accordance with the
requirements in Section 3.4.11 and Appendix G of the EIA Study Brief, Annexes
10 and 18 of the EIAO-TM and EIAO Guidance Note 8/2010. According
to the EIA Study Brief Section 3.4.11, the Study Area for Landscape Impact
Assessment included areas within 500 m distance from the boundary of the
project site while the Study Area for Visual Impact Assessment was defined by
zones of visual influence.
Potential Impact on Existing Trees
3.9.2
The
current landscape resources and character within the site are of limited
quality and value. The Project provides a clear opportunity for enhancement by
undertaking significant tree planting and public space creation. Approximately
160 trees will be lost during the construction of the Project, but none of them
are of any importance or with high amenity value. It is anticipated that the
Project will carry out planting of about 340 new trees.
Sources of Potential Landscape and Visual Impacts
3.9.3
Sources
of landscape and visual impacts during the construction phase are as follows:
·
Site clearance works
·
Piling, basement and
foundation construction
·
Construction traffic and
temporary traffic management activities
·
Utilities diversions, restoration
and reconstruction work
·
Night lighting
·
Temporary works hoardings,
noise barriers and enclosures
3.9.4
The
sources of landscape and visual impact of the Project during the operation
phase would be:
·
The operation of the Main
stadium, Public sports ground, Indoor sports centre and the Office and Hotel
Block
·
The operation of roads
serving the Project
·
The operation of new
landscape area and landscaped deck
·
Changes to settlement
pattern, scale and human interaction
·
Ongoing changes in the
quality or quantity of landscape resources including topographic features,
vegetation and hydrology
·
Loss of visual amenity
previously presented by lost landscape resources
Recommended Landscape and Visual Mitigation
Measures
Construction Phase
·
Night-Time Lighting Control
·
Temporary Landscape
Treatments
·
Decoration of Hoarding
Operation Phase
·
Greening of Walkways, Ramps
and Decks
·
Green Roofs and Vertical
Greening
·
Tree Planting
·
Responsive Building Design
·
Integration of Development
Boundaries
·
Integration with Dining Cove
and Waterfront Promenade
·
Light Penetration under
Landscape Deck
·
Incorporation of a new park
within the development area
·
Development of Bespoke
Amenity Area Lighting Scheme
Residual Impact on Landscape Resources and
Landscape Character Areas
3.9.5
With
the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, no substantial adverse
landscape impacts are anticipated during construction. The anticipated
landscape impacts are generally moderately adverse to insubstantial during the
construction phase due to site clearance and removal of existing vegetation.
3.9.6
The
residual impact on landscape resources and landscape character areas in
operation phase is generally insubstantial to slight beneficial at day 1 of
operation. After 10 years of operation, the extensive tree planting and
greening along with the incorporation of an urban park is anticipated to bring
moderate beneficial residual impacts to some landscape resources. The residual
impact on landscape character areas is slight beneficial to moderate
beneficial.
Residual Impact on Visual Sensitive Receivers
3.9.7
With
the implementation of proposed mitigation measures, no substantial adverse
impacts are anticipated during construction. The visual impacts are generally
moderately adverse to insubstantial at all visual sensitive receivers.
3.9.8
No
substantial adverse impacts are anticipated during operation. With suitable
mitigation measures taken to enhance visual harmony such as extensive greening and superstructure
designs that would respond well to the
existing and planned urban context in terms of scale, height and bulk,
the different facilities within the Project will have an overall enhanced
visual effect on the area. The landscape deck will contribute as an attractive open
space and also integrate all the buildings within the MPSC development. The
landscape deck provides seamless linkage from the MTR stations to the Metro
Park and the surrounding developments within the KTD. It offers a visually
stimulating environment and helps to create a sense of place. The residual
visual impact in the operation phase is generally moderately adverse to
insubstantial on day 1 of operation and slightly adverse to slightly beneficial
after 10 years of operation.
3.9.9
Glare
impact on Visual Sensitive Receivers (VSRs) located near the MPSC and
associated above ground structure have been reviewed. The predicted glare
ratings for all of the VSRs within the study boundary are below the Glare
Rating Limit adopted. No significant discomfort glare condition is anticipated.
To minimize potential glare impact on the VSRs, a number of mitigation measures
are proposed during the construction and operational phases. For example,
lighting control such as adjustable shields will be utilized in the construction
site. Lighting will be designed not to direct towards sensitive receivers and
external lighting should be switched off after 11 p.m. automatically. Only
essential light (e.g. lighting for safety and security) will be maintained at
the acceptable level as required.
Overall Acceptability
3.9.10 It is not anticipated that there will be any
adverse residual impacts generated by the Project, whilst significant greening
of the site, coupled with promoting visual integration of the proposed
development with the surrounding urban context through control of scale,
massing and building disposition will provide a long term beneficial visual
outlook.
Key Assessment Scope and Key Criteria
3.10.1 The cultural heritage impact assessment (CHIA) was
carried out according to EIA Study Brief Section 3.4.12 and Appendix H.
Criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing the cultural heritage
impact stated in Annexes 10 and 19 of the EIAO-TM were followed. The Study Area
is limited to a distance of 200 metres from the site boundary of the Project.
Construction & Operational Phase
Impacts
3.10.2 Relevant CHIAs in previously approved EIA reports
have been reviewed (Kai Tak Development (Register No.: AEIAR-130/2009) and
Shatin to Central Link (SCL) – Tai Wai to Hung Hom Section (Register No.:
AEIAR-167/2012)). Based on the site location and the survey plan
in Year 1904, the project site was formerly a sea area. It is unlikely that ancestors have congregated at
the project site. Hence, the project site has no archaeological value. Built
Heritage Impact Assessment is not required as there is no built heritage within
the Study Area of the Project and associated works.
3.10.3 The Project will not interfere with Lung Tsun
Stone Bridge Site of Archaeological Interest. The southern portion of the former Sacred Hill and the southern portion
of the archaeological survey-cum-excavation area of SCL – Tai Wai to Hung Hom
Section for Sacred Hill (North) fall within the CHIA Study Area. Since no archaeological deposit was
discovered from the southern portion of the archaeological
survey-cum-excavation at Sacred Hill (North) and these two areas fall outside
the project site, there is no cultural
heritage impact arising from this Project and no mitigation measure is
required.
4.1.1
The Environmental
Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) requirements and the mitigation measures to be
implemented during the construction and operational phases of the Project have
been specified in the EM&A Manual. The EM&A Manual contains full details of the proposed baseline
and impact monitoring programmes, as well as performance specifications, audit
requirements and monitoring procedures.
4.1.2
The EM&A
programme covers the design, construction and operational phases of the Project
to monitor the environmental impacts on the neighbouring sensitive receivers.
The following table and sections summarize the EM&A requirements for each
environmental aspect:
|
Aspects |
Environmental Monitoring and Audit |
||
|
Design Phase |
Construction Phase |
Operational Phase |
|
|
Air Quality |
O |
P |
O |
|
Hazard to Life |
O |
O |
O |
|
Noise |
O |
P |
P |
|
Water Quality |
O |
O |
P(1) |
|
Sewerage and Sewage Treatment |
O |
O |
O |
|
Waste Management |
O |
P |
O |
|
Land Contamination |
O |
O |
O |
|
Ecology |
O |
P |
O |
|
Landscape and Visual |
P |
P |
P |
|
Cultural Heritage |
O |
O |
O |
(1): Water quality of re-use surface run-off during operational phase will be
monitored if natural turf is adopted at the Main Stadium or the Public Sports
Ground.
Construction Phase
4.2.1
Dust emissions are the major
sources of construction air quality impact and therefore 1-hour Total Suspended
Particulates (TSP) levels will be monitored at representative air monitoring
stations (AMSs) (mostly residential uses) before and throughout the
construction period.
4.2.2
Baseline monitoring will be
conducted to determine the existing air quality before commencement of
construction work. Air quality monitoring will be carried out throughout the construction
period at all AMSs. 1-hour TSP monitoring will be carried out at least 3 times
in every 6 days when the highest dust impact takes place.
4.2.3
Action and Limit levels for
the monitoring are set up based on the baseline monitoring results and the
relevant Air Quality Objectives. If exceedance of air quality criteria is recorded, actions listed under
Event and Action Plan shall be followed. Additional monitoring works shall be
carried out until the excessive dust emission or the deterioration in air
quality is rectified, and upon agreement with the Independent Environmental
Checker. Weekly site inspection will be carried out to confirm the recommended
mitigation measures are properly implemented and effective.
Operational Phase
4.2.4
Operational phase air
quality is expected to be either complying with the Air Quality Objectives or
the exceedance is mainly due to high background level and offsite air pollutant
sources, which does not have long term serious environmental implications. No
monitoring or auditing is proposed.
4.3.1
As no adverse hazard to
life impact is anticipated in this Project, no environmental monitoring or
audit is proposed.
Construction Phase
4.4.1
Powered mechanical
equipment is the major noise source during the construction phase. Construction
noise levels will be measured in terms of the A-weighted equivalent continuous
sound pressure level (Leq) before and throughout the construction period.
4.4.2
Baseline monitoring will be
conducted to determine the existing noise level before commencement of
construction work. During the
construction phase, monitoring will be carried
out weekly at representative noise monitoring stations (NMS) (mostly
residential uses).
4.4.3
Action Level or Limit Level
for the monitoring is considered to be triggered in case of the receipt of a
noise complaint or an exceedance of the criteria stipulated in the EIAO-TM. If noise exceedance is
recorded, additional noise monitoring will be conducted in accordance with the
Event and Action Plan. The monitoring shall be considered complete if the
exceedance has been rectified or proved to be from sources other than the
Project construction works.
Operational Phase
4.4.4
Real time noise monitoring
at selected locations will be conducted during any music event in the Main
Stadium held in the daytime/evening period for the first 3 years of operation.
After the 3-year monitoring period, a review of the findings of the monitoring
will be conducted to determine whether further monitoring will be required. The
corresponding actions shall follow the Event and Action Plan in the EM&A
Manual. Trigger and action Levels and corresponding follow-up actions have been
established. The Action Level is the background noise level (BGL)
+10 dB measured in terms of Leq(5min). The Trigger Level in
terms of Leq(15min) is 3 dB lower than BGL +10 dB. Whenever the measured noise
level in Leq(5min) exceeds the Action Level at any of the monitoring points,
closing the retractable roof shall start immediately. If the measured noise
level in Leq(15min) reaches the Trigger Level, the organizer should be informed
to reduce the noise levels. If the noise levels measured (rounded up or down to
the nearest integer) in the next two 15-min time periods keep rising, closing
of the retractable roof shall also start immediately even if the Action Level is
not exceeded.
Construction Phase
4.5.1
During the construction phase, no off-site marine water quality impact would be
expected from the Project and there would not be any marine-based works for the
proposed works. Subject to the requirements in the effluent discharge licence
to be issued under the Water Pollution Control Ordinance, regular water quality
monitoring may be carried out at representative water discharge locations to
ensure that relevant water quality standard can be met but this is not
considered necessary if the recommended mitigation measures are implemented
properly.
Operational Phase
4.5.2
If natural turf is
used as the default playing surface at the Main Stadium or the Public Sports
Ground, the use and application of fertilizers and pesticides
will follow the normal practices according to the LCSD’s prevailing code of
practice and the Pesticides Ordinance (Cap. 133). Although issues arising from
the potential residual fertilizers and pesticides are not envisaged, an
intercepting system will be developed for storage of surface water for reuse
and a Stormwater Re-use Management Plan will be prepared and implemented, so as to ensure no
residual fertilizers and pesticides from the turf surface run-off is
discharged. The Stormwater Re-use Management Plan will set out the proposed
surface run-off monitoring locations, monitoring frequency and parameters, as
well as the Event and Action Plan and mitigation measure, etc.
4.6.1
Based on the estimated sewage
flow of the Project, and the sewerage and sewage treatment capacity in Kai Tak
Development area, adverse sewerage impact arising from the Project is not
anticipated. No monitoring or audit is proposed.
4.7.1
The contractor will
formulate waste management measures on waste minimization, storage, handling
and disposal in a Waste Management Plan as part of Environmental Management
Plan in accordance with the Environment, Transport and Works Bureau Technical
Circular (Works) No. 19/2005. Weekly site audit should be carried out to check
the implementation status of the recommended waste management measures
throughout construction period.
4.7.2
During the operational
phase of the Project, with proper implementation of the proposed mitigation
measures, adverse waste impact arising from the Project is not expected. No
monitoring or audit is required.
4.8.1
As the Site is
free from land contamination, environmental monitoring in
relation to land contamination is not required.
4.9.1
Mitigation
measure proposed for air quality, noise, water quality and landscape, visual
and glare impacts are also applicable to terrestrial ecology. Implementation
status and the effectiveness of air quality, noise, water quality and landscape
and visual mitigation measures will be audited through regular site inspection
during construction phase. No specific environmental monitoring programme on
ecology during both construction and operational phases is required.
4.10.1
Environmental
management and audit for landscape and visual resources is recommended during
the design, construction and operation phases of the Project.
Design Phase
4.10.2
The
landscape measures and lighting mitigation measures proposed to mitigate the
landscape, visual and glare impacts of the scheme should be embodied into the
detailed landscape and engineering design specifications, drawings and contract
documents. The design phase EM&A requirements for landscape and visual resources comprise the
audit of detailed landscape works specifications and lighting design to be
prepared during the detailed design stage together with ensuring that the
design is sensitive to landscape, visual and glare impacts and that landscape
resources are retained as far as practicable. In the event of a non-conformity,
the Event and Action Plan shall be followed.
Construction &
Operational Phases
4.10.3
Prior to commencement of the main construction
contract, a specialist landscape contractor should be employed by the Project Proponent
in order to facilitate the advance preparation and relocation of any trees in
conflict with the proposed works. A specialist landscape sub-contractor should
be employed by the works contractor for the implementation of further soft
landscape works and subsequent maintenance operations during the establishment
period.
4.10.4
All measures undertaken by the works and landscape
contractors shall be audited by a Registered Landscape Architect as a member of
the Environmental Team (ET), on a regular basis to ensure compliance with the
intended aims of the measures. In the event of a non-conformity, the Event and
Action Plan shall be followed.
4.11.1
No
EM&A requirements are considered necessary during the construction and
operation phases of the proposed
works as there are no adverse impacts on known sites of archaeological
interest, potential areas of archaeological interest or built heritage.
5.1.1
28.2 ha of land
situated in the North Apron Area of the former Kai Tak
Airport, which is currently used partly as construction sites and partly for temporary car parks will be developed into the MPSC in order to make up
for the general shortage of sports facility in Hong Kong. The MPSC is designed
with landscaped features and extensive greenery to cohere with the surrounding
Kai Tak Development Area, making it a landmark in the city.
5.1.2
The Project will give rise to some environmental impacts (i.e. air quality, noise,
water quality, waste management, landscape and visual). The EIA study however concludes that the impacts are acceptable during both construction and
operational phases with proper implementation of the recommended mitigation
measures and EM&A programme.
5.1.3
Upon completion of the MPSC, the landscaped area will be
grown with vegetation that help preventing soil erosion, and enhance the landscape and visual quality of the area. In the long run, the Project will make a positive
and significant contribution to realizing the Government’s policy objectives
for sports development.