1
InTRODUCTIOn
1.1.1
The 30-hectare Siu Ho Wan Depot (SHD) has been
highlighted in both 2015 and 2016 Policy Address as a potential railway site
which is being explored by MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) in collaboration
with the Government to provide housing supply.
1.1.2
In the 2017 Policy Address, the Chief Executive
announced the initiative to commence the statutory planning procedures for SHD
this year, with the aim to provide not less than 14,000 residential units in
the medium to long term.
1.1.3
The Lantau Development Advisory Committee
(LanDAC) has also recommended ¡°Strategic Economic and Housing Development¡± as
the planning theme for the North Lantau Corridor. The proposed comprehensive
development atop SHD is in line with the planning theme, which has been
earmarked as one of the medium-term projects in the First-term Working Report
published by LanDAC in January 2016.
1.1.4
In
support of the Government¡¯s
policy initiative to make better use of railway land to provide housing
supply, MTRCL has commissioned a
consultancy study to formulate scheme options for comprehensive residential and commercial development (hereinafter referred to as the ¡°SHD Topside Development¡±) to optimise the development potential of SHD. The SHD Topside Development, with a new Siu Ho Wan Station (SHO) proposed along
the Tung Chung Line (TCL) to meet the transportation needs of the development
and enable building of a sustainable community, is based on an indicative scheme and indicative
development/implementation programme formulated for providing the reference
parameters for this Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The arrangements for implementation will
be separately considered by the Government in due course.
1.1.5
Under the indicative scheme, to facilitate the
construction of the SHD Topside Development, the existing SHD will undergo
replanning works to make room for the phased construction of the SHD Topside
Development, while maintenance and supporting services to the existing Tung
Chung Line (TCL), Airport Express Line (AEL) and Disneyland Resort Line (DRL)
should be maintained without causing disruption to the normal operation. A new Siu Ho Wan Station (SHO) has been
proposed along the Tung Chung Line (TCL) tracks to meet the transportation
needs of the development and enable building of a sustainable community. The environmental impacts
associated with the construction and operation of the proposed SHO and SHD
Replanning Works (hereafter referred to as the ¡°Project¡±) has been assessed in
this Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study.
1.2.1
The Project as presented in Figure No. NEX1062/S/SHD/ACM/Z10/101 comprises the following key elements:
¡¤
SHD Replanning Works within the existing SHD
boundary;
¡¤
Construction of concrete slab which would also
provide support for construction of SHD Topside Development podium decking, as
well as property enabling works for SHD Topside Development;
¡¤
New SHO station and associated trackworks at
existing AEL/TCL, as well as western access and local accesses; and
¡¤
Sewerage network provision outside existing SHD
boundary to cater for sewage generated by the Project for treatment at the Siu
Ho Wan Sewage Treatment Works.
1.2.2
The project elements, the SHO and SHD Replanning
Works, are classified as the following Designated Projects (DPs) under Part I,
Schedule 2 of the EIA Ordinance (EIAO):
¡¤
Item A.2 ¨C A railway and its associated station
(i.e. SHO and associated trackworks on AEL/TCL).
¡¤
Item A.4 ¨C A railway siding, depot, maintenance
workshop, marshalling yard or goods yard (i.e. the operation of SHD).
1.3.1
This EIA study was conducted for SHO and
SHD Replanning Works in accordance with the EIA Study Brief No. ESB-296/2016
issued in November 2016, and the Technical Memorandum on Environmental
Impact Assessment Process (TM-EIAO).
i.
the overall acceptability of any adverse environmental consequences that
are likely to arise as a result of the Project;
ii.
the conditions and requirements for the detailed design, construction
and operation of the Project to mitigate against adverse environmental consequences
wherever practicable; and
iii.
the acceptability of residual impacts after the proposed mitigation
measures are implemented.
Interface with SHD Topside
Development EIA
1.3.3
As discussed in Section 1.1.5, SHD Replanning Works is proposed to facilitate the
construction of SHD Topside Development and to make room for the phased
construction of the SHD Topside Development, while the proposed SHO is proposed
to meet the transportation needs of the SHD Topside Development and enable
building of a sustainable community.
1.3.4
An EIA Study Brief (ESB-294/2016) was issued for
SHD Topside Development, SHO and associated trackworks, SHD Replanning Works
and associated facilities in September 2016. After the issue of the EIA Study
Brief (ESB-294/2016), more design details on the SHO and SHD Replanning Works
were developed. It was therefore proposed to prepare a separate EIA study for
railway related works (i.e. the Project) (Railway EIA). The arrangement of this separate EIA
study is to streamline the project implementation and for ease of reference of
the public. Potential environmental
interface issues as well as cumulative impacts have been addressed in detail
collaboratively in the course of the Railway EIA and the SHD Topside Development
EIA studies, and findings presented to address the requirements of
corresponding EIA study briefs, i.e. ESB-296/2016 for the Project and
ESB-294/2016 for SHD Topside Development.
1.4.1
This Executive Summary (ES) highlights the key
information and findings of this EIA study.
2.1.1
The 30-hectares SHD is sited on reclaimed land
in Northshore Lantau. It is
delineated as ¡°railway area¡± under the Railway Area Plan (RAP) which also
covers AEL and TCL. The SHD has
operated since 1998 for supporting the operation of the existing TCL, AEL and
DRL. The existing SHD comprises
stabling sidings and main depot building located in the centre of the site,
permanent way facilities at the north eastern side, test track at the southern
area, and other supporting facilities including maintenance workshops,
utilities and drainage, ancillary buildings and facilities, traction substation
and sewage pumping station, etc.
2.2.1
The purpose, objective and benefits of the
Project have been considered in detail in the EIA Study and are summarised as
follows:
¡¤
Supporting
Government¡¯s Strategic Planning Objective: the Project, which includes
railway replanning works at the existing SHD to allow for topside development
and provides a new railway station at Siu Ho Wan, is compatible with the key
strategic direction of ¡°Underscoring Compact Development¡± and ¡°Optimising Land
Uses¡± as indicated in the public engagement document (October 2016) of ¡°Hong
Kong 2030+: Towards a Planning Vision and Strategy Transcending 2030¡± (Hong
Kong 2030+), in which it proposes to underscore transit-oriented, compact
development with railway as the backbone of the public transport system and to
explore more topside development respectively.
¡¤
Supporting
Government¡¯s Policy Address in Housing Supply: The Project will optimize
utilization of an existing 30-ha railway depot site for creation of land
resources suitable for property development to provide as much housing as
practicable for addressing issues on housing supply in phases, while the normal
operation of the depot, TCL, AEL and DRL could be maintained.
¡¤
Enhancing
the Environment in Siu Ho Wan: With isolation of industrial interface by
confining the future depot operation within a concrete slab/podium deck, the
surrounding local environment in the Siu Ho Wan area will be improved and more flexibility
for future land use planning of the Siu Ho Wan area is anticipated. The provision of SHO along the existing
TCL serving the local community in Siu Ho Wan is also in line with the
transport policy of having more environmentally friendly railway as the
backbone of transport network
Scenario ¡°With¡± and ¡°Without¡± Project
2.2.2
Upon completion of each stage of the SHD
Replanning Works and respective phase of the SHD Topside Development, the
existing land use of the Project site which is solely for industrial operation
will be changed to diverse development with a mix of industrial
activities, major trade or commercial activities and residential premises. The provision of SHO on TCL would also in
future alleviate the traffic burden on the surrounding road network and the
associated vehicular emissions and traffic noise in Siu Ho Wan area.
2.2.3
Without the Project, the existing SHD remains an
open air design with some of maintenance activities within isolated buildings
and most of stabling tracks as well as train washing facilities located outdoor
without cover, would induce potential indirect impacts to the local environment,
even though there are currently no sensitive receivers in the vicinity of
existing SHD. Furthermore, without the Project would constrain the flexibility
of future development planning of land uses in the Siu Ho Wan area that are
sensitive to industrial land use. The
provision of housing supply through the utilization of the railway depot site
could also not be achieved.
2.3.1
During
the course of the EIA study, the public concern on direct impact on ecological
resources, such as the Tai Ho Priority Site and the Brothers Marine Park
has been taken into account during the selection of alternatives/options in the
planning and conceptual design stage of the Project, such that neither
temporary works area nor elements of the Project will encroach into any recognised sites of conservation
importance.
2.3.2
The considerations of alternatives/options of
the Project are considered in detail in the EIA Study and are summarised as
follows.
Siting of Replanning Works and Replanning Sequences
2.3.3
Considering that the existing location of SHD is
currently being occupied for depot operation without any natural habitats of
flora and fauna on site, and any air quality and noise sensitive receiver in
the immediate proximity, the SHD site is justifiable from land use suitability
and technical sustainability perspectives to optimize utilization of railway
land for comprehensive development purpose. Also, having the construction works on a
developed area which is currently used as a railway depot will avoid potential
impacts on ecological and landscape resources. In addition to significant buffer distance
from ecological sensitive area such as the Tai Ho Priority Site, potential
environmental impacts on existing sensitive receivers are minimal and no
environmental dis-benefit is anticipated with respect to the development
siting.
2.3.4
During the development of a feasible depot
replanning sequences, engineering and environmental factors have been
considered. Among all
considerations, maintaining a safe depot operation condition without any
disturbance to the operating railway is an overriding consideration. Also, it would be necessary to sequence
the works such that prolonged decommissioning and reprovisioning of depot
facilities could be avoided in each stage in order to achieve the short term
goal for housing supply and more importantly, the planning vision in Hong Kong
2030+. Having regard to these
constraints and considerations, options available for the depot replanning
works would be limited. After
considering all the key engineering factors including environmental factors in
the option selection, the proposed 4-stage replanning option is selected
as this option can minimize industrial interface issue to the
largest practicable extent and also can be well respond to the
constraints presented in construction planning and address the overriding needs
of the depot operation.
Station Options
Construction
Method, Sequences and Programme
2.3.6
Similar to the development of the depot
replanning schemes, maintaining a safe depot operation condition without any
disturbance to the operating railway is an overriding consideration factor in
the determination and selection of construction sequences and methods.
2.3.7
Apart from quieter construction method (e.g.
bored piling method) will be adopted for the foundation of the SHD Topside
Development, the construction of the concrete slab would also be completed as
soon as possible in respective staging area such that remaining works would be
conducted under the concrete slab to minimize the potential construction noise
impact. The option of completing
the whole concrete slab within the SHD boundary (i.e. Year 2034) before
population intake at the SHD Topside Development was reviewed but considered to
contradict with the prime objective of the SHD Topside Development in providing
as much housing as practicable for addressing the need of housing supply. Although there would be potential impacts
on earlier phases of the SHD Topside Development due to construction noise from
remaining stages of the SHD Replanning Works and operational noise impacts from
the existing SHD, comprehensive mitigation measure packages could be adopted to
control the noise impacts to meet established noise standards. Key summary of noise assessment findings is
provided in Section 3.3.
2.3.8
Marine transportation for construction materials
and spoil during the construction phase of the Project would also be avoided as
far as possible to minimize marine traffic and associated potential impacts on
marine environment.
2.4
Details of the
Project
SHO and SHD Replanning Works
2.4.1
The proposed depot replanning sequences will be
carried out in stages to allow continuous and safe operation of existing TCL,
AEL, DRL as well as the existing SHD.
Details of the tentative depot replanning scheme is presented in Appendix 2.1, with the tentative layout
of Reprovisioned SHD presented in Figure
No. NEX1062/S/SHD/ACM/Z10/102. The function and area of the
Reprovisioned SHD will be the same as the existing SHD. Construction of SHO will be conducted
during Stage 1 SHD Replanning Works.
2.4.2
The existing sewerage system serving the SHD is
required to be upgraded and reprovided for the future Reprovisioned SHD and
SHO. Provision of sewerage system would include installation of new sewage
pumping station and additional rising mains (change from rising main to twin
rising mains). The installation of
new rising mains outside the existing SHD boundary would follow same alignment
of existing rising main without encroachment on any sites of conservation
importance in order to minimize impacts on the environment.
2.4.3
A western access road bridge connecting to the
proposed Tai Ho Interchange bridge link would be required to serve SHO,
Reprovisioned SHD and SHD Topside Development. Local accesses including vehicular
access ramp and staircase as mean of escape (MoE) would also be provided to
enhance the connectivity to SHO and SHD Topside Development.
Construction Works Areas
2.4.4
Major works areas during the construction phase
of the Project include the areas of SHD Replanning Works, SHO and associated
trackworks, as well as provision of sewerage system, western access and local
accesses outside the existing SHD boundary. Temporary works area within the Scheme
Boundary may be required for the provision of site office, temporary storage of
construction materials, utility or temporary access, subject to actual site
conditions and constraints, to support the construction of the Project. Locations of major works areas are
indicated in Figure No. NEX1062/S/SHD/ACM/Z10/105.
Construction Programme
2.4.5
As an indicative reference for this EIA, the
tentative construction programme of the Project and SHD Topside Development, as
well as the population intake of SHD Topside Development, is summarised in Table 2.1. The construction interface between the
Project and SHD Topside Development is provided in Appendix 2.2.
Table 2.1 Tentative Construction
Programme
|
SHD Replanning Works
|
SHO and Associated Trackworks
|
Planned SHD Topside Development (1)
|
|
Stage
|
Works Programme(1)
|
Completion of works &
Operation
|
Works programme
|
Phase
|
Commencement of Superstructure Works
|
Population
Intake(4)
|
|
Start
|
Slab Completion(2)
|
|
1
|
2019
|
2023
|
2024
|
2019 ¨C 2026(3)
|
1
|
2023
|
2026-2027
|
|
2
|
2024
|
2026
|
2028
|
-
|
2
|
2027
|
2030
|
|
3
|
2028
|
2030
|
2032
|
-
|
3
|
2031
|
2034
|
|
4
|
2032
|
2034
|
2036
|
-
|
4
|
2032 for Phase 4a(5)
2035 for Phase 4b & 4c
|
2035 - 2038
|
Notes:
(1) The foundation of SHD Topside Development including
piling and excavation works will be conducted in parallel with replanning works
in respective phasing.
(2) Upon completion of concrete slab in respective
phasing area, the contractor(s) of SHD Topside Development would be on board to
commence the superstructure works.
(3) Civil construction works for SHO will be completed
in 2023 while building services (BS) and electrical and mechanical (E&M)
works will be conducted in 2024-2026. Operation of SHO would commence in 2026.
(4)
Population
intake year of different phases of SHD Topside Development is shown in Appendix 2.3.
(5)
Phase 4a SHD
Topside Development is located above Stage 3 SHD Replanning Works.
3.1.1
The EIA process provides a means of identifying,
assessing and reporting the environmental impacts
associated with the construction and operation of the Project based on the
engineering design information available at this stage. It is an iterative process that has been
followed in parallel with the design process to identify the potential environmental
effects of various design options, and develop alternatives as well as
mitigation measures to be incorporated into the design, construction and
operation of the Project. Public
concerns have also been considered and incorporated into the design and EIA
process where appropriate. Mitigation measures have been recommended to avoid
some potential environmental impacts, while others are minimized or mitigated
to acceptable levels.
3.1.2
The findings of this EIA study have determined
the likely nature and extent of the following environmental impacts predicted
to arise from the construction and operation of the Project:
¡¤
Air Quality;
¡¤
Noise;
¡¤
Water Quality;
¡¤
Sewerage and sewage treatment;
¡¤
Waste Management;
¡¤
Land Contamination;
¡¤
Landscape and Visual; and
¡¤
Hazard to Life.
Assessment Scope and Key
Criteria
3.2.1
Assessment of potential air quality impacts on
air sensitive receivers (ASRs) arising from the construction and operation of
the Project has been conducted in accordance with the criteria and guidelines
as stated in Annexes 4 and 12 of the TM-EIAO as well as the requirements given
in Clause 3.4.4 of the ESB-296/2016.
The assessment for construction dust impact is within 500m study area
from the Scheme Boundary and adopts quantitative assessment approach, while the
assessment for air quality during operational phase of the Project adopts
qualitative assessment approach in view of the nature of the Project remains
unchanged.
Construction Phase
3.2.2
Potential
air quality impacts from the construction works for the Project would mainly be
related to construction dust from excavation, materials handling, spoil removal
and wind erosion. Background
concentrations from pollutants and the pollutant-emitting activities in
immediate neighbourhood of the Project Site including open road traffic, construction
works of SHD Topside Development, Organic waste treatment facilities (OWTF),
Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA) and marine vessels have been included to
evaluate the cumulative dust impact. With the implementation of mitigation
measures in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation such as
proposed dust suppression measures, regular watering once per
hour on areas with dusty surface and good site practices, the predicted dust
impact at ASRs would comply with the hourly, daily and annual
particulate criteria stipulated in the Air Quality Objectives (AQOs) and TM-EIAO.
No adverse dust
impact on the ASRs is anticipated in each stage of SHD Replanning Works. A summary of¡¡the
predictions for representative air pollutants related to construction dust
impact after implementation of mitigation measures is given Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Summary of Construction Dust Impact after
Implementation of Mitigation Measures
|
Stage
|
TSP Conc. (µg/m3)
|
RSP Conc. (µg/m3)
|
FSP Conc. (µg/m3)
|
AQO /
EIAO-TM Compliance
|
|
Max. 1-hour (500)
|
10th highest 24-hour (100)
|
Annual (50)
|
10th highest 24-hour (75)
|
Annual (35)
|
|
1
|
219 ¨C 445
|
78 ¨C 84
|
33 ¨C 35
|
59 ¨C 61
|
24 ¨C 25
|
Yes
|
|
2
|
219 ¨C 355
|
77 ¨C 81
|
32 ¨C 34
|
58 ¨C 60
|
23 ¨C 25
|
Yes
|
|
3
|
219 ¨C 424
|
77 ¨C 90
|
32 ¨C 35
|
58 ¨C 61
|
23 ¨C 25
|
Yes
|
|
4
|
219 ¨C 452
|
77 ¨C 96
|
32 ¨C 35
|
58 ¨C 61
|
23 ¨C 25
|
Yes
|
Note:
Respective criterion is given in bracket.
Operation Phase
3.2.3
With the operation activities at Reprovisioned
SHD same as those at existing SHD, it is anticipated that there would be no
additional air quality impact arising from the operation of Reprovisioned
SHD. Besides, the operation
of SHO associated with emission free electric-powered rail system would result
in minimal exhaust air from railway operations, and thus the air quality impact
during operation phase of SHO is considered insignificant. The odour impact arising from the
reprovisioned Sewage Pumping Station (SPS) would also be insignificant with proper
implementation of mitigation measures. No adverse residual impact is expected
during operation phase of the Project.
Assessment Scope and Key Criteria
3.3.1
Assessment
of potential noise impacts on noise sensitive receivers (NSRs) arising from the
construction and operation of the Project has been conducted in accordance with
the criteria and guidelines as stated in Annexes 5 and 13 of the TM-EIAO and
the Noise Control Ordinance (NCO), as well as the requirements given in
Clause 3.4.5 of the ESB-296/2016. The
assessment covers the NSRs within 300m study area from the Scheme Boundary.
Construction Phase
3.3.2
Construction noise associated with the use of
powered mechanical equipment (PME) for different construction phases has been
assessed. With the implementation
of practical mitigation measures including good site management practices, use
of movable noise barrier, full enclosure and use of quiet plant, the maximum
predicted construction noise impact would be 75 dB(A) for noise sensitive receivers
(NSRs). Hence, no unacceptable impact arising from the construction of the
Project is anticipated.
Operation Phase
3.3.3
The noise impact associated with the operation
of the fixed plant noise sources has been assessed. The predicted
fixed plant noise levels at the representative NSRs would comply with the stipulated
noise criteria based on the calculated maximum allowable SWLs for the planned
equipment and the estimated sound power levels for the existing equipment. There would be no residual fixed plant
noise impact with the adoption of the proposed maximum permissible sound power
levels for the planned fixed plant.
3.3.4
The potential rail noise impacts associated with
the operation of existing SHD and TCL/AEL will be alleviated by the provision
of the mitigation measures including self-protecting building design, noise
canopies and cantilever noise barrier for protecting the affected NSRs to
acceptable noise levels.
Alternative approaches in noise mitigation package could be further
explored by the future developers of SHD Topside Development in the detailed
design stage. With the
implementation of the recommended noise mitigation measures, the predicted
railway noise levels at all NSRs would comply with the noise criteria, and no
residual impact is anticipated. A summary of the predicted mitigated rail noise
levels and summary of cumulative operational noise impact are given Tables 3.2 and 3.3 respectively.
Table 3.2 Summary of
Mitigated Rail Noise Levels at
Representative Planned NSRs
|
Assessment Scenario
|
Mitigated Overall Noise Levels, Leq
30min dB(A)
Daytime /Evening (Night-time)
|
Criteria, Leq 30min dB(A)
Daytime /Evening (Night-time)
|
|
Scenario 1A,1B & 1C
|
<40 - 61 (<40 ¨C 58) for NSR with ASR
C
<40 - 46 (<40 ¨C 44) for NSR with ASR
B
|
70 (60) for ASR C
65 (55) for ASR B
|
|
Scenario 2
|
<40 - 57 (<40 - 57) for NSR with ASR
C
<40 - 42 (<40 - 42) for NSR with ASR
B
|
70 (60) for ASR C
65 (55) for ASR B
|
|
Scenario 3
|
<40 - 57 (<40 - 57) for NSR with ASR
C
<40 - 49 (<40 - 49) for NSR with ASR
B
|
70 (60) for ASR C
65 (55) for ASR B
|
|
Scenario 4
|
<40 - 60 (<40 - 60) for NSR with ASR
C
<40 - 49 (<40 - 49) for NSR with ASR
B
|
70 (60) for ASR C
65 (55) for ASR B
|
Table 3.3 Summary of Cumulative
Operational Noise Levels at Representative Planned NSRs
|
Assessment Scenario
|
Predicted Cumulative Operational Overall Noise Levels, Leq 30min dB(A)
Daytime /Evening (Night-time)
|
Criteria, Leq 30min dB(A)
Daytime /Evening (Night-time)
|
|
Scenario 1A,1B & 1C
|
56-65 (48-58) for NSR with ASR C
57 (<48 - 50) for NSR with ASR B
|
70 (60) for ASR C
65 (55) for ASR B
|
|
Scenario 2
|
57-63 (49-55) for NSR with ASR C
56-59 (46-50) for NSR with ASR B
|
70 (60) for ASR C
65 (55) for ASR B
|
|
Scenario 3
|
57-61 (51-55) for NSR with ASR C
54-59 (45-50) for NSR with ASR B
|
70 (60) for ASR C
65 (55) for ASR B
|
|
Scenario 4
|
57-61 (51-58) for NSR with ASR C
53-59 (43-50) for NSR with ASR B
|
70 (60) for ASR C
65 (55) for ASR B
|
3.3.5
Based
on the findings of cumulative operational noise impact assessment, the
mitigated noise levels at all representative NSRs would comply with the noise
criteria as stipulated in the TM-IND. It is therefore concluded that, with
implementation of the recommended noise mitigation measures for fixed plant,
mainline operation and train operation within SHD, there would be no adverse
cumulative operational noise impacts to the NSRs.
Assessment Scope and Key
Criteria
3.4.1
The potential water quality impacts have been
identified and analysed for compliance with the prevailing Water Quality
Objectives (WQOs) stipulated under the Water Pollution Control Ordinance
(WPCO), the criteria and guidelines stated in Annexes 6 and 14 of the TM-EIAO.
3.4.2
The assessment area basically covers 500m from the Scheme
boundary, and are further extended to include inland watercourses and
associated water systems in the vicinity, existing and planned drainage system
which potentially affected by the Project and relevant Water Sensitive
Receivers (WSRs) within the North Western WCZ.
Construction Phase
3.4.3
No marine works will be conducted during the
construction of the Project, and the main source of potential water
quality impact is from the land-based construction activities. Minimization of water quality impact could be achieved
through implementing adequate mitigation measures and good site practices. Regular site
inspections should be undertaken routinely to inspect the construction
activities and works areas in order to ensure the recommended mitigation
measures are properly implemented. Therefore, no adverse residual water quality
impact is anticipated.
Operation Phase
3.4.4
The key source of potential impact on water quality
during the operational phase will be the sewage effluent, emergency discharge
from sewage pumping station, surface and road runoff from the SHO and Reprovisioned
SHD, as well as accidental spillage of chemicals. With the incorporation of the
precautionary measures, no emergency sewage discharge during the operation of
SHO and Reprovisioned SHD is anticipated. Besides, water quality impacts associated
with the non-point source discharge from the partial SHO would be minimized
with proper implementation of the recommended mitigation measures.
Implementation of the project would not result in adverse water quality impact.
Assessment
Scope and Key Criteria
3.5.1
The impact assessment has been carried out in
accordance with the criteria and guidelines outlined in Annex 14 of the TM-EIAO,
other relevant guidance note and practice guide, and the requirements given in Clause 3.4.7 of the ESB-296/2016.
Operation Phase
3.5.2
No unacceptable impact due to the cumulative
sewerage generation from the Project and the SHD Topside Development on the
sewerage system is anticipated. With the
implementation of mitigation measures including the provision of twin rising
mains, dual feed power supply, spare pumps, emergency storage and control
system etc, no emergency sewage discharge during the operation of SHO and Reprovisioned
SHD is anticipated.
Assessment Scope and Key
Criteria
3.6.1
The potential wastes management implications have
been assessed in accordance with the criteria and guidelines stated in Annexes
7 and 15 of the EIAO-TM, and the requirements given in Clause 3.4.8 of the
ESB-296/2016.
Construction Phase
3.6.2
Different types of waste generated from the
Project during construction phase would include Construction and Demolition
(C&D) materials (from demolition works, excavation and piling works, site
formation and construction of facilities and station), land-based sediments,
general refuse from workforce, and chemical wastes from the maintenance of
construction plant and equipment.
3.6.4
The total volume of land-based sediment to be
excavated from the Project is estimated to be approximately 21,826 m3,
including approximately 18,764 m3 for Type 1 ¨C Open Sea Disposal,
2,198 m3 for Type 1 ¨C Open Sea (Dedicated Sites) Disposal and 864 m3
for Type 2 ¨C Confined Marine
Disposal in accordance with PNAP No. 252 (ADV-21). With the implementation of the
recommended mitigation measures and the requirements of PNAP No. 252 (ADV-21),
no unacceptable environment impacts would be expected from excavation,
transportation and disposal of land-based sediment.
Operation Phase
3.6.5
The main waste types generated during the
operation of the SHO and Reprovisioned SHD would be municipal solid waste and chemical
waste from the staff, commercial operators and maintenance activities. The handling, collection, transportation
and disposal practices of the identified waste generated would follow the
current practices at other operating railway lines. It is anticipated that no unacceptable impacts
would arise if the mitigation measures are strictly followed.
Assessment
Scope and Key Criteria
3.7.1
Potential of land contamination within the Scheme
Boundary has been examined. A land
contamination assessment was completed in accordance with the guidelines stated
in the Annex 19 of the TM-EIAO, other relevant guidance note and practice guide,
and the requirements given in Clause 3.4.10 of the ESB-296/2016.
Potential
Land Contamination Issues
3.7.2
Potentially contaminated land within the Scheme
Boundary has been identified in the Contamination Assessment Plan (CAP) through
the site appraisal exercise. Based
on the site appraisal results, 9 facilities / areas (i.e. AB2, AB3, AB6, AB8,
AB9, Transformers located outside AB11, AB16, AB22 and MDB) within existing SHD
have been identified as potentially contaminated and require further site
investigation. Since the concerned
areas are still in operation and undertaking the SI works at this stage is not
feasible due to significant impact to the existing SHD operations, therefore,
the SI works are recommended to be carried out after decommissioning of
concerned facilities but prior to construction works at the concerned areas to
confirm any contaminated area. The
remediation works, if required, should be completed and RR(s) demonstrating the
completion of remediation works at the area(s) (if any) confirmed with
contamination will be prepared and submitted to EPD for approval prior to the
commencement of construction works at the contaminated areas. After completion of remediation for any
identified contaminated areas, no residual impact in respect of land
contamination on the future users is anticipated.
Assessment
Scope and Key Criteria
3.8.1
The assessment evaluated the impacts to
landscape resources and visual sensitive receivers according to EIAO GN 8/2010
and the criteria and guidelines stated in the Annexes 10 and 18 of TM-EIAO respectively,
and the requirements given in Clause 3.4.11 of the ESB-296/2016.
Construction
Phase
3.8.2
There is no old and valuable trees (OVT) and
tree of specific conservation interest identified within the Scheme Boundary. Based on a broad brush tree survey,
approximately 510 nos. existing trees, which are all common species,
would be affected by the Project. Compensatory tree planting would
be provided in accordance with relevant Technical Circulars where applicable
to compensate for felled trees.
3.8.3
During construction phase, there would be
negligible residual impact on Visual Sensitive Receivers (VSR) at Tung Chung
New Town Extension Tung Chung East Development, and moderate magnitude of
visual impact for VSR at North Lantau Highway, Cheung Tung Road and Vehicular
Access Bridge to North Lantau Highway who view the Project at a closer
distance. It is predicted that the magnitude of visual change for remaining
identified VSRs is considered as small due to the longer distance from the
project site.
Operation
Phase
3.8.4
With the implementation
of proposed mitigation measures, there would be insubstantial to moderate residual
impact on Landscape Resources (LRs) and Landscape Character Areas (LCAs) in day
1 of operation and Year 10 upon reinstatement of the affected area.
3.8.5
The residual impact at VSRs during operation
phase would be reduced to insubstantial to slight with the aesthetic design of
aboveground structures in both Day 1 and Year 10 of operation with the
implementation of proposed mitigation measures.
3.8.6
As a whole, the residual landscape and visual
impacts of the Project is considered acceptable with the implementation of the
recommended mitigation measures during construction and operation phases.
Assessment Scope and Key
Criteria
3.9.1
The hazard to life assessment is conducted in
accordance with the criteria and guidelines as stated in the requirements given
in the Clause 3.4.9 of the EIA Study Brief, as well as Annex 4 of the
TM-EIAO.
Potential Hazard to Life Issues
3.9.2
Siu Ho Wan Water Treatment Works (SHWWTW) and
Sham Shui Kok Chlorine Transhipment Dock (SSK Dock) were identified as
potential hazardous facilities. The
SHWWTW is the Potentially Hazardous Installation (PHI) with its consultation
zone (CZ) encroached into the Scheme Boundary, while the potential risk due to
the operation of SSK Dock is negligible. For the SHWWTW, Quantitative
Risk Assessment (QRA) has been conducted for the SHWWTW to account for the
cumulative risk posed to the Project and SHD Topside Development.
3.9.3
The criterion of Annex 4 of the TM-EIAO for
Individual Risk is met with regards to the hazards to life posed by
SHWWTW. The assessment results show
that the cumulative societal risk for the impact from SHWWTW fall into the ¡°As Low As Reasonably
Practicable (ALARP)¡± region. No specific mitigation measure is required
for the Project based on cost-benefit analysis. Nevertheless, precautionary
measures for
chlorine released from SHWWTW such as provision of emergency plan for efficient evacuation including good practice
(i.e. adequate training and drills for construction workers) during
construction phase shall be implemented to further reduce the risk level.
4.1.1
The EIA Study of the Project has demonstrated its
compliance with the TM-EIAO requirements.
Actual impacts during the construction works will be monitored through a
detailed EM&A programme. Full
details of the programme are presented in a separate EM&A Manual associated
with the EIA Report. The EM&A programme
will provide management actions and detail the recommended mitigation measures
to check the effectiveness of the recommended mitigation measures and
compliance with relevant statutory criteria, thereby ensuring the environmental
acceptability of the construction and operation of the Project.
5.1.1
The implementation of this Project is in line
with the Government¡¯s strategic planning objective by utilizing land resources
above existing depot and is compatible with 2017 Policy Address by providing as
much housing as practicable to address issues on housing supply in phases. The Project would also enhance the local
environment in Siu Ho Wan and allow flexibility for future land use planning of
the Siu Ho Wan area.
5.1.2
This EIA Study has assessed the overall
acceptability of the environmental impacts likely to arise as a result of the
construction and operation of the Project, in accordance with the ESB-296/2016,
TM-EIAO and other relevant guidelines and criteria. It has demonstrated the protection of
the population and environmentally sensitive resources and the acceptability of
any environmental impacts from this Project. The findings of EIA Study indicated
that, with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, the
Project would be environmentally acceptable and in compliance with the relevant
assessment standards/criteria of the TM-EIAO. Where appropriate, EM&A mechanisms
have been recommended to verify the environmental acceptability of the Project
and to check the effectiveness of the recommended mitigation measures.