10 Landscape and Visual Impact

10.1 Introduction

10.1.1 The following sections identify the potential landscape and visual impacts during the construction and operation of the proposed development at San Hing Road (SHR), San Hing Road Site Extension (SHR Site Extension) and Hong Po Road (HPR), Tuen Mun, in according with the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance.

10.1.2 In according with the criteria as stated in Annex 10 (Criteria for Evaluating Visual and Landscape Impact, and Impact on Sites of Cultural Heritage) and Annex 18 (Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment) of the Technical Memorandum on EIAO-TM, the landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) for this project includes:

· a list of the relevant environmental legislation, standards and guidelines;

· a review of the planning and development framework of the Assessment Area;

· a landscape and visual impact assessment methodology;

· a landscape impact assessment section, includes:

§ a landscape baseline study providing a comprehensive and description of the baseline Landscape Resources (LRs) and Landscape Character Areas (LCAs) within the SHR and HPR assessment area;

§ identification of potential landscape impacts;

§ prediction of the nature of landscape impacts and the potential magnitude of change they will cause as well as the potential significance of impacts before the implementation of mitigation measures;

§ recommendation of appropriate mitigation measures and associated implementation programmes;

§ prediction of the significance of residual landscape impacts after the implementation of the suggested mitigation measures;

· a visual impact assessment section, including:

§ a visual baseline study, providing comprehensive details of visual elements surrounding the Proposed Development Area (PDA) and their Visually Sensitive Receivers (VSRs);

§ identification of potential visual impacts;

§ prediction of the nature of visual impacts and the potential magnitude of change they will cause, as well as the potential significance of impacts before the implementation of mitigation measures;

§ recommendation of appropriate mitigation measures and associated implementation programmes;

§ prediction of the visual impacts after implementation of the suggested mitigation measures; and

· an assessment of the acceptability or otherwise of the predicted residual impacts, according to the five criteria set out in Annex 10 of the EIAO-TM, namely beneficial, acceptable, acceptable with mitigation measures, unacceptable or undetermined.

Scope of Study

10.1.3 The Study is a Designated Project (DP) under Item 1 Schedule 3 of EIAO – Engineering Feasibility Study of urban development projects with a study area covering more than 20 ha or involving a total population of more than 100,000. To implement the Project, there is an item classified as DP under Schedule 2 of the EIA Ordinance, summarised below:

Table 10.1 Summary of Designated Project (DP)

Item Ref. No.	Ref. Category No.	Descriptions of DP under EIAO	Work Component
DP 1	F.3 (b) of Part 1 Schedule 2	A Sewage Pumping Station with an installed capacity of more than 2,000 m^3 per day and a boundary of which is less than 150m from an existing or planned residential area	Construction of a sewage pumping station (SPS) with a design capacity of 14,629m^3/day at SHR Site and is less than 150m from an existing / planned residential area

10.2 Environmental Legislation, Standards and Guidelines

10.2.1 This report has been prepared in accordance with Annexes 10 and 18 of the TM and EIAO Guidance Note No. 8/2010 on “Preparation of Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance” for evaluating and assessing combined landscape impact and visual impacts of the Project and associated works.

10.2.2 In addition, the following standards and guidelines have been referred to for assessing the landscape impact and visual impacts associated with the Project:

· AFCD Nature Conservation Practice Note No.2 - Measurement of Diameter at Breast Height (DBH);

· AFCD Nature Conservation Practice Note No.3 – The Use of Plant Names;

· CEDD TC No. 5/2018 - Vetting Committee on Slope Appearance;

· CEDD TC No. 12/2019 - Guidelines for Making Submissions to the Advisory Committee on the Appearance of Bridges and Associated Structures;

· CEDD TC No. 7/2020 - Tree Works Vetting Panels

· CEDD - The Greening Master Plan (GMP) for Tuen Mun District;

· Country Park Ordinance (Cap 208);

· DEVB TC(W) No. 4/2020 – Tree Preservation;

· DEVB TC(W) No. 5/2020 – Registration and Preservation of Old and Valuable Trees;

· DEVB-TC(W) No. 6/2015 – Maintenance of Vegetation & Hard Landscape Features;

· DEVB TC(W) No. 2/2012 – Allocation of Space for Quality Greening on Roads;

· DEVB TC(W) No. 3/2012 – Site Coverage of Greenery for Government Building Projects;

· DEVB TC(W) No. 1/2018 - Soft Landscape Provisions for Highway Structures;

· DEVB TC(W) No. 9/2020 - Blue-Green Drainage Infrastructure

· DEVB Greening, Landscape and Tree Management Section (April 2015) - Guidelines on Tree Preservation during Development;

· DEVB Greening, Landscape and Tree Management Section (April 2012) - Greening of Noise Barriers;

· ETWB TCW No. 5/2005 - Protection of natural streams/rivers from adverse impacts arising from construction works;

· ETWB TC No. 17/2000 – Improvement to the Appearance of Slopes;

· ETWB TC No. 25/93 – Control of Visual Impact of Slopes;

· ETWB TCW No. 36/2004 - The Advisory Committee on the Appearance of Bridges and Associated Structures (ACABAS);

· EIAO Guidance Note No. 8/2010;

· EIAO TM Annex 18: Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment;

· EIAO TM Annex 10: Criteria for Evaluating Visual and Landscape Impact, and Impact on Sites of Cultural Heritage;

· Forests and Countryside Ordinance (Cap 96);

· GEO No. 1/2011 – Technical Guidelines on Landscape Treatment for Slopes (2011), 217p;

· Greening, Landscape and Tree Management Section (GLTMS), DEVB - Guidelines on Tree Transplanting (September 2014)

· Greening, Landscape and Tree Management Section (GLTMS), DEVB - Management Guidelines for Stonewall Trees (December 2013)

· Greening, Landscape and Tree Management Section (GLTMS), DEVB – Street Tree Selection Guide (2016)

· Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (updated 2015) Chapter 4 - Recreation, Open Space and Greening and Chapter 11 – Urban Design Guidelines;

· Housing Department Technical Circular No. 1/2020 - Planning Briefs for Public Housing Development Projects;

· HQ/GN/15 - Guidelines for Greening Works along Highways;

· HyD PN No. BSTR/PN/003-Revision C – Noise Barriers with Transparent Panels;

· Planning Department and Housing Department – Guiding Principles on Green Coverage for Public Housing Developments (2010);

· PNAP No.75 - APP-23 Hoardings, Covered Walkways and Gantries (including Temporary Access for Construction Traffic) Building (Planning) Regulations Part IX;

· The Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (the Ordinance), Cap. 586;

· Study on Landscape Value Mapping of Hong Kong;

· Town Planning Ordinance (Cap 131); and

· WBTC No. 7/2002 – Tree Planting in Public Works.

10.3 Methodology

Landscape

10.3.1 The Assessment Area for the landscape element of the LVIA which is generally defined by a distance of 500m from the project site boundary. It is illustrated in Figure 10.1a & 10.1b. The proposed layout plan of the Project is shown in Figure 2.3a and 2.3b, while the site section of the proposed development is shown in Figure 10.2.

10.3.2 The landscape baseline study identified all LRs and LCAs located within Assessment Area using a combination of desktop study and site verification.

10.3.3 Identification of the LRs and LCAs within the Assessment Area was achieved by desk-top study of topographical maps, information databases and photographs, making reference to the previous reports, as well as undertaking site visits.

10.3.4 The sensitivity of LRs/ LCAs was then determined. It is influenced by a number of factors including whether the LR/ LCA has any special elements that are considered rare or important, whether it is considered to be of local or regional significance, whether there are any statutory or regulatory limitations/requirements relating to the resource, the quality of the LR/ LCA, the maturity of the LR/ LCA, and the ability of the LR/ LCA to accommodate change. The sensitivity of each LR and LCA are classified as follows:

· Low: Landscape resource or landscape, the nature of which is largely tolerant to change;

· Medium: Landscape resource or landscape of moderately valued landscape character, reasonably tolerant to change; and

· High: Important landscape resource or landscape of particularly distinctive character or high importance, sensitive to relatively small changes.

10.3.5 For LVIA purposes, the study carried out a broad-brush tree surveys to evaluate the trees in areas with high tree concentrations within the Assessment Area. Key data collected include species name, tree parameters such as estimated height and diameter breast height, etc. The relevant information from the broad-brush tree survey has been extracted to supplement information regarding the baseline conditions, impact assessment and mitigation measures. The details tree survey record shall be referred to Appendix 10B.

10.3.6 The magnitude of change depends on several factors including the scale of development, the compatibility of the Project with the surrounding landscape, the duration of the impact, (i.e. whether it is temporary or permanent), and the reversibility of the change. The broad-brush tree survey assists to identify the physical extent and landscape context of the impact. The magnitude of landscape change is classified as follows:

· Negligible: The LR/ LCA will experience no discernible change;

· Small: The LR/ LCA will experience slight or barely perceptible changes;

· Intermediate: The LR/ LCA will experience a moderate change; and

· Large: The LR/ LCA will experience a major change.

10.3.7 By synthesising the magnitude of change and the sensitivity of the various LRs/ LCAs the potential significances of impacts are categorised in a logical and consistent fashion. Table 10.2 shows the rationale for dividing the degree of significance of impacts into four thresholds, namely insignificant, slight, moderate, and substantial, depending on the combination of a low-medium-high degree of sensitivity of LR/ LCA with a negligible-small-intermediate-large magnitude of change. This matrix will apply for the assessment of the majority of situations. However, in certain cases a deviation from these circumstances may occur, and these will be justified if they occur. The significant thresholds are defined as follows:

· Insignificant: The impact will cause no discernible change in the existing landscape quality;

· Slight: Adverse/beneficial impact which will cause a barely perceptible deterioration or improvement in existing landscape quality;

· Moderate: Adverse/beneficial impact which will cause a noticeable deterioration or improvement in existing landscape quality; and

· Substantial: Adverse/beneficial impact which will cause substantial deterioration or improvement in existing landscape quality.

Table 10.2 Significance of Landscape or Visual Impacts

		Receptor Sensitivity (LR/LCA/Visually Sensitivity Receiver)
		Low	Medium	High
Magnitude of Change	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
	Small	Slight	Slight/Moderate	Moderate
	Intermediate	Slight/Moderate	Moderate	Moderate/ Substantial
	Large	Moderate	Moderate/ Substantial	Substantial

Note: In those instances where there are two possible impacts significance ratings, consideration will be made of all factors concerned to justify the final rating.

Visual

10.3.8 The Assessment Area for the visual element of the LVIA is based on the computed visual envelope and zone of visual influence. The visual impact assessment (VIA) analyses the potential visual impacts of the Project with respect to the existing views and key selected Visually Sensitive Receivers (VSRs), to represent key public views, as identified within the Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI). The ZVI is the assessment area for the VIA.

10.3.9 Identification and plotting of the Visual Envelope are achieved by making reference to the available project information and through the study of topographic and aerial maps, as well as modelling. The ZVI has been drawn up considering site visits to verify where the Project could potentially be seen from and affect views.

10.3.10 The selection of VSRs takes into account view from key strategic and popular local vantage points, including pedestrian nodes, popular areas used by the public or tourists for outdoor activities, recreation, rest, sitting-out, leisure, walking, sight-seeing, and prominent travel routes. The visual sensitivity of public viewers from the vantage points is classified as low, medium or high, taking into the activity of views (e.g. viewers engaged in working activities are less sensitive to change), and the duration and distance over which the proposed Project would remain visible, as well as the public perception of value attached to the view from the VSR.

10.3.11 In addition to VSRs, Visual Elements of the area are described, including attractors such as ridgelines, mountain backdrop and woodland, and detractors such as pylons etc. that currently exist or are planned in the area, as these can enhance, degrade or neutralize visual impact of the proposed Project.

10.3.12 Factors affecting the magnitude of changes for assessing visual impacts include:

· compatibility of the project with the surrounding landscape;

· duration of impacts under construction and operation phases;

· scale of development;

· reversibility of change;

· viewing distance, and

· potential blockage of view.

10.3.13 Factors affecting the sensitivity of receivers for evaluation of visual impacts include:

· value and quality of existing views;

· availability and amenity alternative views;

· type and estimated number of receiver population;

· duration or frequency of view, and

· degree of visibility.

10.3.14 Similar to methodology on evaluating landscape resources, sensitivity of receivers is classified as below:

- low which is slightly sensitive to changes in viewing experience; medium which is moderately sensitive to changes in viewing experience or high which is highly sensitive to changes in viewing experience.

And magnitude of change is considered as below:

- negligible which VSRs would experience no observable changes in viewing experience or no considerable changes in visual context and negligible numbers of viewers would be affected; small which VSRs would experience minor changes in viewing experience and few numbers of viewers would be affected; intermediate which VSRs would experience moderate changes in viewing experience and considerable numbers of viewers would be affected or large which VSRs would experience significant changes in view experience and large numbers of viewers would be affected.

The significant thresholds are considered as follows:

· Insignificant: The impact will cause no discernible change in the existing visual quality;

· Slight: Adverse/beneficial impact which will cause a barely perceptible deterioration or improvement in existing visual quality;

· Moderate: Adverse/beneficial impact which will cause a noticeable deterioration or improvement in existing visual quality; and

· Substantial: Adverse/beneficial impact which will cause substantial deterioration or improvement in existing visual quality.

10.3.15 Overall assessment of landscape and visual impacts would be classified into five levels of significance based on type and extent of the effects according to Annex 10 of EIAO Technical Memorandum, as below:

- The impact is beneficial if the project will complement the landscape and visual character of its setting, will follow the relevant planning objectives and will improve overall and visual quality;

- The impact is acceptable if the assessment indicates that there will be no significant effects on the landscape, no significant visual effects caused by the appearance of the project, or no interference with key views;

- The impact is acceptable with mitigation measures if there will be some adverse effects, but these can be eliminated, reduced or offset to a large extent by specific measures;

- The impact is unacceptable if the adverse effects are considered too excessive and are unable to mitigate practically;

- The impact is undetermined if significant adverse effects are likely, but the extent to which they may occur or may be mitigated cannot be determined from the study. Further detailed study will be required for the specific effects in question.

Mitigation

10.3.16 Any visual impact will be moderated, with mitigation and enhancement measures proposed for the development. Mitigation measures will be recommended for both landscape and visual elements to alleviate the identified impacts. It should be noted that often one measure will help to mitigate both the landscape impact and visual impacts e.g. screen planting may shield a structure making it less visible, as well as providing compensatory planting for lost vegetation. The recommended mitigation measures will alleviate the impacts identified during the impact analysis and the significance of residual impact, after the implementation of mitigation measures, will be reported.

Overall Evaluation

10.3.17 These residual impacts take account of both landscape and visual considerations that will potentially occur due to the proposed development & associated structures, have been assessed in accordance with the guidelines and criteria stated in Annex 10 (Criteria for Evaluating Visual and Landscape Impact, and Impact on Sites of Cultural Heritage) and Annex 18 (Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment) of the EIAO-TM.

10.4 Review of Planning & Development Control Framework

Planned Land Use

10.4.1 The Assessment Area falls across two Outline Zoning Plans (OZPs), as illustrated in Figure 10.3.

· Approved OZP No. S/TM/35 – Tuen Mun; and

· Approved OZP No. S/TM-LTYY/10 – Lam Tei and Yick Yuen.

10.4.2 These OZPs have been reviewed to examine the planned land use in the Assessment Area. Table 10.3 and Table 10.4 provide details on the areas of different zones affected by the Project.

Table 10.3 Characteristics of Assessment Area within Approved Lam Tei and Yick Yuen OZP No. S/TM-LTYY/10

Zoning Type	Existing Area within the 500m Assessment Area (ha)	Area affected (ha) (Approximate % of zoning affected)	Comments on Major Land Use Changes
Green Belt (GB)	45.93	12.48 (27.19%)	Approximately 12.48 ha of the GB zoning will change to residential. This is discussed further in the text following Sections 10.4.3 – 10.4.6.
Residential (Group E) (R(E))	11.64	9.30 (79.90%)	This residential area is affected by the residential development at SHR Sites, SHR Site Extension and associated school site. While compatible for residential purposes, the buildings heights proposed for the Project are greater than currently allowed in the OZP and this is discussed further in the text following Section 10.4.3.
Major Road and Junction (MRDJ)	5.39	0.37 (6.81%)	This road network is compatible with the MRDJ zoning type and only a very small portion may be affected but will remain the same zone type.
Village Type Development (V)	38.68	0.06 (0.16%)	Not a significant area.
TOTAL	101.64	22.21 (21.85%)	-

Table 10.4 Characteristics of Assessment Area within Approved Tuen Mun OZP No. S/TM/35

Zoning Type	Existing Area within the 500m Assessment Area (ha)	Area affected (ha) (Approximate % of zoning affected)	Comments on Major Land Use Changes
Government, Institution or Community (GIC)	44.82	0.10 (0.22%)	Not a significant area.
Green Belt (GB)	50.99	0.65 (1.27%)	A small portion of the GB in this OZP may be affected by the road network of the Project. This is discussed further in the text below this Section 10.4.3 – 10.4.6.
Major Road and Junction (MRDJ)	36.47	10.54 (28.9%)	This road network is compatible with the MRDJ zoning type.
Residential Group (R(A))	111.63	0.52 (0.47%)	Not a significant area – likely discrepancies in GIS mapping.
Residential Group (R(E))	2.18	2.04 (93.58%)	Most area of this zoning in this OZP may be affected.
Open Space (O)	9.51	0.56 (5.89%)	A very small portion of the O in this OZP may be affected by the road network of the Project.
Other Specific Uses	1.14	0.01 (0.88%)	Not a significant area.
Village Type Development (V)	50.85	0.26 (0.51%)	A small area of this zone is likely to be affected by the Project public infrastructure works. These are considered always permitted on land falling within boundaries the Outline Zoning Plan. This is discussed further in the text following this Section 10.4.9.
TOTAL	307.59	14.68 (4.77%)	-

10.4.3 In OZP of S/TM-LTYY/10, the main zoning types affected by the Project, as shown in Table 10.3 are: Green Belt (GB), Residential (Group E) (R(E)) and also a small area of Major Road and Junction (MRDJ) and Village Type Development (V). The ‘R(E)’ zone is intended primarily for phasing out of existing industrial uses through redevelopment for residential use. Since the Project is for new residential developments, this is compatible, however currently the ‘R(E)’ zoning restricts maximum building height to 4 storeys over single-storey car park (15 m) and the maximum building height for the Project can reach up to approx. +150mPD. The visual impact of this increased height is assessed within this LVIA report. The ‘GB’ area affected constitutes approximately 27.19% of the ‘GB’ area within the Assessment Area and is affected by the HPR Site, SHR Site and SHR Site Extension which are not considered compatible with the zoning intention and discussed further below. In OZP S/TM/35, a total of eight (8) zoning types are affected by the Project but with the exception of a small area of GIC, GB, R(A), O, Other Specific Uses and V, the Project is considered compatible with the OZP zoning.

Green Belt

10.4.4 It should be noted that in December 2014 the Government announced in the adoption of a total housing supply target of 480,000 units for the ten-year period from 2015-16 to 2024-25 (with a 60%:40% public-private housing split) to cater for the housing needs of the public, and to achieve this target it continues to adopt a series of measures, including optimal use of the developed land in the existing urban areas and new towns, as well as the land in the vicinity of the existing infrastructure.

10.4.5 The Government also carried out a review of GB sites in Hong Kong and in early June 2014, there were about 15,200 ha of land zoned as GB (excluding areas that fall within the boundaries of Country Parks) in the statutory plans of Hong Kong. It identified some 70 GB sites with a total area of 150 ha which it proposed to rezone for housing development, i.e. approximately 1% of the GB sites in Hong Kong and this would provide 70% of the required public housing.

10.4.6 The Project causes the inevitable loss of GB zone totalling just under 14 ha, mainly at the HPR Site, SHR Site Extension and SHR Site. Based on the Explanatory Statements for GB of the Approved Lam Tei and Yick Yuen OZP No. S/TM-LTYY/10 and Approved Tuen Mun OZP No. S/TM/35, the planning intention of GB is primarily for defining the limits of urban and sub-urban development areas by natural features and to contain urban sprawl as well as to provide passive recreational outlets and there is a general presumption against development within these zones which may include foothills, lower hill slopes, woodland, traditional burial grounds or vegetated land which occurs at the urban fringe.

10.4.7 Chapter 4 Recreation, Open Space and Greening of the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG) should also be referred to ensure sufficient open space and greening is provided within the new developments. The mitigation measures presented as part of this LVIA in Section 10.8 below, also seek to address some of the loss of greenery in the area.

10.4.8 Re-zoning of the current GB zone is necessary to allow for residential development.

Village Area

10.4.9 In OZP of S/TM-LTYY/10 and OZP of S/TM/35, small area V is also affected by the Project road works where the proposed realignment of Hong Po Road needs to maintain access to Site 2 at Tuen Mun Area 54 and access to village roads; these accesses are currently zoned V.

10.4.10 The planning intention of this V zone includes reflecting existing recognised and other villages and is primarily intended for development of Small Houses by indigenous villagers. In total 0.32 ha is within the Assessment Area that is not directly compatible with the current planning intention.

Current, Committed and Planned Development

10.4.11 Existing residential estates/houses located in the neighbourhood of HPR Site, SHR Sites and SHR Site Extension, are listed below:

· Villa Pinada;

· Villages – Po Tong Ha, Siu Hang Tsuen, Tsz Tin Tsuen and San Hing Tsuen;

· Siu Hong Court;

· Po Tin Estate;

· Yan Tin Estate

10.4.12 There are several planned and committed development sites located in the neighbourhood of HPR Site, SHR Sites and SHR Site Extension, as listed below:

· Private Housing Development at Site 3/4 (West) in Tuen Mun Area 54;

· Public Housing Development at Site 1&1A, Site 3 & 4(East), Site 4A (South) & Site 5 of Area 54, Tuen Mun; and

· Public Housing Development at Tuen Mun Area 29 West.

10.4.13 The latest development parameters of the planned and committed development sites, in Tuen Mun Area 54, Tuen Mun Area 29 West, San Hing Tsuen and SHR Site are listed in Table 10.5, Table 10.6 & Table 10.7 and Table 10.8 below.

Table 10.5 Development Parameters of Tuen Mun Area 54

Location	Proposed Use	Site Area (m^2)	Tentative Year of Completion
Site 1 & 1A	PRH	29,000	2021/2022
Site 2	PRH	42,000	2017 (Completed)
Site 3/4 (East)	PRH	35,200	2021/2022
Site 3/4 (West)	Private Housing R(A)	51,443	2024/2025
Site 4A (South)	PRH	9,600	2027
Site 4A (East)	School	N/A	2026/2027
Site 4A (West)	Sports Centre & Community Hall	11,000	2022/2023
Site 5	HOS	8,000	2027

Table 10.6 Development Parameters of Tuen Mun Area 29 West

Location	Proposed Use	Site Area (m^2)	Tentative Year of Completion
Tuen Mun Area 29 West	PRH	N/A	2024/2025

Table 10.7 Development Parameters of Private Development

Location	Proposed Use	Site Area (m^2)	Tentative Year of Completion
Private Development/TMLTYY/291	Private Housing	1,904.92	-
Private Development A/TM-LTYY/370	Private Housing	174.3	-
Private Development A/TM-LTYY/371	Private Housing	143.3	-
Private Development A/TM-LTYY/372	Private Housing	158.8	-

Table 10.8 Summary of approved planning application within the PDA

Application No.	Proposed Use	Approval Date	Expired Date	Site Area(m^2)	Status
A/TM-LTYY/381	Private Housing (Residential Group E)	29.05.2020	29.05.2024	14,553.0	Active
A/TM-LTYY/337	Private Housing (Residential Group E)	23.06.2017	23.06.2021	3,832.4	Active

Note: Application No. A/TM-LTYY/273 has been approved with conditions by TPB in 2014. However, the permission was expired in 2018, and the subsequent applications for extension of time limit under Application No. A/TM-LTYY/273-1 were rejected by TPB in 2018.

Development Schedule of Private Housing Development [Site 3/4 (West)]

10.4.14 Site 3/4 (West) is a private housing development with a total site area of approximately 50,000 m². Site 3/4 (West) is zoned as “Residential (Group A)” on the Tuen Mun Outline Zoning Plan (OZP).

Education Uses [Site 4A (East)]

10.4.15 Based on the information provided by Education Bureau (EDB), the school sites at Site 4A (East) are tentatively reserved for a 30-classroom primary school and a 30- classroom secondary school. The number of students for the secondary school and the primary school are 1,080 and 810, respectively.

Government/Institution/Community Uses [Site 4A (West)]

10.4.16 A building complex consists of a Sports Centre (SC) cum Community Hall is planned at Site 4A (West). Based on the Hong Kong Planning Standards & Guidelines, the standard provision for recreation buildings (e.g. sports centres or leisure centre) requires a site area of 6,000 m².

Visual Context

10.4.17 The visual context of the Assessment Area of the proposed Project is set between two green and undeveloped hill ranges in the west and east (with country park in the east), with a low lying valley running between them that is highly developed and dominated by an urban high rise environment to the south, as illustrated in Figure 10.4. This figure also shows how the proposed Project links to the urban high-rise area, slightly expanding it to the north west.

Key Development Parameters

10.4.18 A summary of key information for the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment is summarised below:

Table 10.9 Key Information for the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Development Parameters	SHR Site Extension	SHR Site	HPR Site
Design Population	4,700	26,300	30,000
Max. Building Height	+150mPD	+150mPD	+150mPD
Tentative completion Date	2030	2031	2033

10.5 Baseline Conditions

General

10.5.1 This section presents the preliminary review of the baseline landscape and visual conditions in the Assessment Area, particularly the areas that will be affected by the Project. Note this area has changed from a generally rural in the 1960s and 70s to a more developed area (See APPENDIX 10A) and therefore, the overall visual landscape has changed over the past decades, with the size of agricultural lands including orchard being largely taken over by a large number of open storage areas, some residential developments and roads. Woodland areas have generally not experienced substantial change, but higher rise buildings have been built in the area, such as Po Tin Estate public housing, and currently there is substantial ongoing site formation and construction works, mainly related to different aspects of the Tuen Mun Area 54 Project.

Broad Brush Tree Survey

10.5.2 A total of 54 groups of trees were identified within the Assessment Area as illustrated in Figure B1 in APPENDIX 10B.

10.5.3 Majority of the species recorded are common in Hong Kong. Eleven (11) trees were recorded during the tree surveys with DBH ≥1 m, which are identified as trees of large size. Further details are provided in APPENDIX 10B, with locations shown in Figure B1. Of these eleven large trees with DBH ≥1 m, 4 trees fall within the Project footprint, which include one (1) Litchi chinensis, two (2) Ficus microcarpa and one (1) Melaleuca cajuputi subsp. Cumingiana.

10.5.4 On the other hand, there are 59 nos. of Aquilaria sinensis identified within 500m assessment area. Most of the Aquilaria sinensis are located at the edge of hillside woodland (tree group HK002 & HK003) near village/ open storage area, while some sparsely distributed at the northern part of Assessment area (tree group HK005, HK006 & HK023). Total 3 nos. of Aquilaria sinensis are located within work limit of proposed Road L7 which would be affected by proposed development. For detail location, please refer to the Broad-Brush Tree Schedule presented in the Appendix B1 of APPENDIX 10B.

10.5.5 Beside Aquilaria sinensis, there are around 81 nos. of other floral species of conservation interest identified within 500m assessment area, including protected species under Forestry Regulations, Cap. 96 (eg. Camellia crapnelliana, Nepenthes mirabilis, Pyrenaria spectabilis & Rhodoleia championii) and other floral species such as Diospyros vaccinioides, Geodorum densiflorum and Gleditsia australis. They are distributed over hillside woodland, while Nepenthes mirabilis were mainly found along two sides of natural stream.

10.5.6 Information from tree groups located within or partly within LRs and LCAs in the Assessment Area has been used to supplement baseline descriptions of LRs and LCAs provided below.

Landscape Baseline Review

10.5.7 This section presents the preliminary review of the landscape baseline conditions in the Assessment Area. LRs and LCAs found within the Assessment Area are categorised according to the presence of common elements including topography, vegetation type (both species and age), built forms, evidence of human modification, land use (past and present) and edges. Reference has been made to the Study on Landscape Value Mapping of Hong Kong.

Sensitivity of Landscape Resources and Landscape Character Areas

10.5.8 Eight (8) broad LRs and three (3) broad LCAs have been identified within the Assessment Area and DP1, their locations are illustrated in Figure 10.5a to 10.5f and Figure 10.6a to 10.6f, respectively. Photographic records of the various broad LRs and LCAs are shown in Figure 10.7a to 10.7d and Figure 10.8, respectively. The LRs and LCAs identified within the Assessment Area are as detailed below:

(1) LR 1 – Village/ Low-rise Residential Development: The main existing villages in the Assessment Area are concentrated into distinctive village areas as shown in the Figure 10.5a – 10.5e, which are sub-divided into seven (7) groups including: LR 1a - Siu Hang Tsuen, LR 1b - Tsz Tin Tsuen, LR 1c - Kei Lun Wai, LR 1d - San Hing Tsuen, LR 1e - Tuen Mun San Tsuen, LR 1f – Villa Pinada and LR 1g – Chung Shan Area. These type of villages and low-rise residential development are very common in Tuen Mun, as well as New Territories.

· LR 1a – Siu Hang Tsuen (158,602m²) is located at the eastern side of proposed Road L7. It is a low-rise village area with intermittent greening, with approximately 340 to 380 nos. of trees. Major trees include common species like Leucaena leucocephala, Macaranga tanarius var. tomentosa and Dimocarpus longan, residents commonly place chairs and tables under the shading area of big trees as a gathering space. It has a relatively typical village setting, with some individual planted trees scattered between village house and public area. The rarity of the LR is low due to its relatively typical village setting and trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to trees within the LR is dominant with young trees with few big trees. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. LR 1a is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 1b – Tsz Tin Tsuen (102,000m²) is located at the southern side of SHR and SHR site extension. It is a typical low-rise village area with intermittent greening, approximately contains 250 – 300 nos. of trees. Dominant species are mostly fruit trees such as Dimocarpus longan, Litchi chinesis and Clausena lansium. Individual planted trees are commonly found around village house and public area. Four (4) nos. of trees of large size are located in LR 1b, including #5 & #6 located in San Hing Tsz while #7 and #12 at Tsz Tin Tsuen. They are all Ficus microcarpa, with fair form and health. Please refer to APPENDIX 10B for locations and additional details. The rarity of the LR is low due to its typical village setting and trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is high due to the LR consists of 4 large trees. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. LR 1b is considered as high in sensitivity.

· LR 1c - Kei Lun Wai (96,775m²) is located in southern side of project site boundary, adjacent to Tsing Lun Road, which is a typical village area with low-rise residential and intermittent greening. It comprised of 350 – 400 nos. of trees, including major species of Dimocarpus longan and Leucaena leucocephala. Domestic plantation is commonly found in these village areas as most of the resident living in house with balcony or small courtyard. These individual plantations are relatively young. The rarity of the LR is low due to its typical village setting and trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the trees within the LR are in mixed range of age. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. LR 1c is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 1d - San Hing Tsuen (289,295m²) is located at the north-east side of SHR site, a common type of village with intermittent greening including trees planted in public area and domestic vegetation around village houses. It consists of approximately 770 – 850 nos. of trees, mainly fruit trees Dimocarpus longan, Litchi chinesis, also common species like Leucaena leucocephala, Macaranga tanarius var. tomentosa and dominated with palm trees Roystonea regia in area near Castle Peak Road (Lam Tei). On the other hand, “To Ancestral Shrine” is located in LR 1d, which is graded as Grade I Historical Building in Hong Kong. It was observed that the “To Ancestral Shrine” is poorly maintained while weeds are growing inside the courtyard and it is inaccessible to public. This type of ancestral shrines is commonly found in New territories. The rarity of the LR is low due to its typical village setting and trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the trees within the LR is dominant with young trees. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. LR 1d is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 1e - Tuen Mun San Tsuen (158,000m²) is located at the eastern side of proposed development, adjacent to Castle Peak Road (Lam Tei). It is also a low-rise village area with typical setting. This LR has limited vegetation, approximately around 120 nos. of trees, with dominant species of Koelretaria bipinnata and Dimocarpus longan. The rarity of the LR is low due to its typical village setting and trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the trees within the LR is dominant with young trees. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. It is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 1f - Villa Pinada (74,532m²) is located at north-west side of SHR Site Extension. It is a modern low-rise complex with some landscaping of open spaces. Less domestic plantation is found in this LR due to limited space of courtyard, with only around 60 – 75 nos. of trees located. They are mainly common fruit trees such as Dimocarpus longan, Clausena lansium and Artocarpus heterophyllus. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the trees within the LR are in mixed range of age. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. LR 1f is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 1g - Chung Shan Area (19,512m²) is located at northern side of SHR Site Extension, next to LR 1f. It is comprised of low-rise village houses amongst vegetation. Village house and public area are scattered with some trees and shrubs for amenity, around 20 – 40 nos., mostly Leucaena leucocephala, Macaranga tanarius var. tomentosa and Dimocarpus longan. Two (2) trees of large size are located in this LR are Ficus elastica (#10 & #11) to the north of Villa Pinada, with fair form and health. Please refer to APPENDIX 10B for locations and additional details. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is high due to the LR consists of 2 no. of large trees. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. LR 1g is considered as high in sensitivity.

· In summary, LR 1a, 1c, 1d, 1e & 1f are considered medium while LR 1b & 1g are considered high in sensitivity.

(2) LR 2 – Open Storage/ Workshop: This LR scattered around HPR Site, SHR Site and SHR Site Extension within the Assessment Area which are increasing in size compared to previous years, and are commonly found in new territories with low local and regional distinctiveness. Without proper maintenance over years, this LR is identified as low in quality and maturity. This LR is further sub-divided into six (6) groups including: LR 2a – HPR Container Terminal, LR 2b – HPR Workshops with peripheral greening, LR 2c – HPR Workshop with Scattered Greening, LR 2d – San Hing Tsuen Open Storage, LR 2e – Tong Hang Road Open Storage and LR 2f – Kwong Shan Tsuen Open Storage.

· LR 2a – HPR Container Terminal (42,997m²) is located within eastern part of HPR site. This LR has limited greening, with around 190 – 230 nos. of relatively young trees, mostly common species like Leucaena leucocephala, Macaranga tanarius var. tomentosa. This LR is generally flat and spacious, occupied with trucks and containers. This LR is relatively rich in trees compared to other open storage sub-division. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the trees within the LR are dominant with young trees. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. And therefore, LR 2a is considered as medium in sensitivity due to the presence of considerable amount of vegetation.

· LR 2b – HPR Workshops with peripheral greening (59,672m²), is located at the lower part of HPR site, adjacent to LR 1b - Tsz Tin Tsuen. It is generally flat and spacious, occupied with containers. It has limited greenery, approximately 50 – 60 nos. of trees, including Dimocarpus longan and Clausena lansium, while weed are intermitted throughout the site. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is low due to the LR only consist of few nos. of young trees. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. LR 2b is considered as low in sensitivity.

· LR 2c – HPR Workshop with Scattered Greening (97,754m²), is located throughout SHR and SHR Extension sites. Compared to other storage area, it has a considerable number of trees, up to 240 – 300 nos. Major species are Leucaena leucocephala, Macaranga tanarius var. tomentosa, Dimocarpus longan and Ficus microcarpa. Weed are also found growing alongside with trunks and container. Also, there is one (1) large tree with DBH ≥1 m located in this LR; Ficus microcarpa (CEDD-T62) beside existing San Hing Road, which is identified with poor form and low amenity value. Please refer to APPENDIX 10B for locations and additional details. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the trees within the LR is dominant with young trees except for 1 large tree. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. In the light of the above, LR 2c is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 2d – San Hing Tsuen Open Storage (23,189m²) is located at the north side of SHR site, with limited greening of around 50 – 60 nos. of trees, mostly Leucaena leucocephala and Macaranga tanarius var. tomentosa. Weed are found over this area, which is relatively flat and spacious. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is low due to the LR only consists of few nos. of young trees. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. LR 2d is therefore considered as low in sensitivity.

· LR 2e – Tong Hang Road Open Storage (2,752m²) is located at the middle of LR 1a - Siu Hang Tsuen. This LR has very limited greening, with around 20 nos. of trees. This area is spacious with some trucks and containers. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is low due to the LR only consists of few nos. of young trees. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. LR 2e is considered as low in sensitivity.

· LR 2f – Kwong Shan Tsuen Open Storage (3,364m²) is located at the south-west side of proposed Road L7, with very limited greening of around 5 - 10 nos. of trees. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is low due to the LR only consists of few nos. of young trees. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. LR 2f is considered as low in sensitivity.

· In summary, LR 2a & 2c are considered as medium in sensitivity due to the presence of considerable amount of vegetation and one large tree in LR 2c. While LR 2b, 2d, 2e & 2f are considered as low in sensitivity due to limited greening and poor quality of existing landscape elements.

(3) LR3 – Agricultural Land/ Orchard: Patches of agricultural land penetrate through the village and open storage /workshop and are scattered throughout the Assessment Area. In particular, agricultural land/orchard comprises the northern half of HPR Site and the central bulk of SHR Site Extension. Compared to previous years, the total area of agricultural land and orchard in the Assessment Area has reduced, resulting an increasing distinctiveness in local context. This LR could be further sub-divided to two (2) groups, including: LR 3a – Actively Cultivated Land and LR 3b – Abandoned Land which the latter account around 8-9% of the total area as indicated in Figure 10.5a & 10.5b.

· LR 3a - Actively Cultivated Land (309,045m²) is rich in vegetation, which comprised up to 850 – 900 nos. of trees. Many fruit trees are located within this LR, which dominated with Dimocarpus longan and Litchi chinesis, and also other common species like Leucaena leucocephala, and Macaranga tanarius var. tomentosa. Two (2) large trees with DBH ≥1 m are located in this LR; which is one (1) Litchi chinensis (CEDD-T23) within SHR site and one (1) Ficus microcarpa (T503) located in the north of Po Tong Ha. Please refer to Figure B3b for photos and Figure B1a – 1e for location of Appendix 10B. Also, there are around 3 - 4 nos. of Aquilaria sinensis identified in this LR. A group of relatively mature Litchi chinensis are located at SHR site near CEDD-T23, ranging from 0.4 – 1m in DBH. These Litchi chinensis are recognized by villagers and would collect the Litchi during fruiting period every year. Though this is a man-made LR and with suitable conditions can be recreated, but the remaining agricultural land and orchards in this area are mostly traditionally managed and it contains a relatively high proportion of trees with high amenity value, quality and maturity. The rarity of the LR is high due to this LR consists of protected species under Cap. 586. The quality and maturity of the LR is high due to the LR consists of high proportion of well-maintained trees with high amenity value and most of the trees within the LR are identified as medium in maturity. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. With the above considerations, the sensitivity of LR 3a is therefore considered as high.

· LR 3b – Abandoned Land (35,151m²) consists of around 160 – 170 nos. of trees. LR 3b has very similar landscape resources in terms of quality with LR 3a but the main areas are mostly occupied by weed due to lack of human activities for long period of time. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the trees within the LR are in mixed range of age. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. And therefore, LR 3b’s sensitivity is considered as medium.

(4) LR 4 – Hillside Woodland: The northwest and southwest of the Assessment Area, which is covered by woodland on the hillside, with a number of streams running through the area (see LR5) with distinctive local landforms in local context. This LR is sub-divided into three (3) groups including: LR 4a – Mixed Woodland, LR 4b – Plantation Woodland and LR 4c – Mature Secondary woodland.

· LR 4a – Mixed Woodland (606,950m²) is located at the northwest part of the site which is a mixture of plantation woodland and secondary woodland. It is semi-natural which originated from artificial plantation woodland. This LR is a very common habitat in Hong Kong with low to medium diversity in floral species and age of over 30 years. Two (2) large trees with DBH ≥1 m are recorded in this LR - one (1) Ficus microcarpa (#9) located at the foot of Chun Shan, and one (1) Melaleuca cajuputi subsp. Cumingiana (T589) located near road alignment. Protected / rare / precious species, including 30 - 35 nos. of Aquilaria sinensis, 3 no. of Pyrenaria spectabilis, 5 nos. Geodorum densiflorum and 1 no. of Diospyros vaccinioides, are identified with LR4a.

LR 4a is dominated by Leucaena leucocephala and Eucalyptus robusta, with relatively young native tree species like Mallotus paniculatus and Pinus massoniana. Fruit trees such as Artocarpus heterophyllus are also found. There are estimated to be 2,250 – 2,550 nos. of trees in LR 4a with mixed maturity, ranging from 0.1 – 1.5m in DBH and 3 – 15m in height.

In the light of this, LR 4a is identified as high in quality, maturity and rarity in local and regional context with consideration of comprising 3 large trees and other rare species with conservation interest and the maturity of trees within the LR are in mixed range in age. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. The overall sensitivity of this LR 4a is considered as high.

· LR 4b – Plantation Woodland (259,000m²) is located at the southwest part of the site which is a modified habitat originated from abandoned orchard, with age of around 40 years. This LR has medium quality and maturity of landscape elements, medium in species diversity which is dominated Acacia confuse, Celtis sinensis, Macaranga tanarius and Ficus hispida. Approximately 390 – 450 nos. of relatively mature trees are located within LR 4b, ranging from 0.1 – 0.4m in DBH and 3 – 12m in height. No species of particular interest is identified in this area. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the trees within the LR are relative mature. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. The overall sensitivity of LR 4b is considered as medium.

· LR 4c – Mature Secondary Woodland (29,026m²) is located next to the western side of proposed Road L7. It is largely natural with age of over 60 years. This LR has very unique composition of high abundance of Fung Shui wood-restricted species which is not common in local and regional context. Major species are native like Macaranga tanarius var. tomentosa and Endospermum chinense, while also dominated by exotic trees like Eucalyptus citriodora that were found at the fringe of this LR. Approximately 200 to 220 trees are estimated, range from 1 – 20m height and with 0.1 – 0.6m in DBH. On the other hand, around 20 nos. of Aquilaria sinensis are located in LR 4c, protected / rare / precious species are also found, including 23 nos. of Pyrenaria spectabilis, 14 nos. of Camellia crapnelliana and 1 no. of Rhodoleia championii, 1 no. of Gleditsia australis and 1 no. of Diospyros vaccinioides are found. In the light of this, the rarity of the LR is high due to uncommon Fung Shui wood-restricted species and consists of protected / rare / precious plant species. The quality and maturity of the LR is high due to the trees within the LR are relative mature. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. The overall sensitivity of this LR 4c is considered as high.

(5) LR 5 – Watercourse: There are a number of watercourses running through the Assessment Area, which could be further classified into twenty four (24) sub-groups for Natural/ Semi-natural Streams (LR 5.1a – 5.1g, 5.1i, 5.1m, 5.2a – 5.2d, 5.3a – 5.3b 5.4a – 5.4d & 5.8a – 5.8e) and eight (8) sub-groups of Channelized Watercourse (LR5.1h, 5.1j – 5.1l & 5.5 – 5.7).

Natural Streams

· LR 5.1a is a natural rocky stream located at ravines of uphill which merged with natural stream LR 5.1b at the top of HPR site, then converted to semi-natural stream LR 5.1f. LR 5.1a is about 13m width and 520m in length. Though this type of stream is common in Hong Kong with low regional distinctiveness, LR 5.1a contains a high number (24 nos.) of Nepenthes mirabilis with conservation interests, please refer to Figure 10.5a. The watercourses were found well managed with high naturalness. In terms of size, LR 5.1a is one of the two largest natural streams. The rarity of the LR is high due to the LR consists of protected species under Cap. 96 and 586. The quality and maturity of the LR is high because they are well managed watercourses with trees of relatively large in size. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. LR 5.1a is considered as high in sensitivity.

· LR 5.1b is also a natural rocky stream that located at ravines of uphill which merged with natural stream LR 5.1a and converted to LR 5.1f. It is 6m in width with total length of 430m. Also, LR 5.1b contains 4 nos. of Nepenthes mirabilis of conservation interests, please refer to Figure 10.5a. Similar to other natural streams, this LR has high level of naturalness and it is being highly-preserved with negligible disturbance to its natural setting. In terms of size, LR 5.1b is one of the two largest natural streams. The rarity of the LR is high due to the LR consists of protected species under Cap. 96 and 586. The quality and maturity of the LR is high because watercourses are undisturbed with trees of relatively large in size. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. And therefore, LR 5.1b is considered as high in sensitivity.

· LR 5.1c is a natural rocky stream located at uphill where merged with natural stream LR 5.1d at the top of LR 1f – Villa Pinada, then converted to semi-natural stream LR 5.1g. With length of 208m and 4m width. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is high because watercourses are undisturbed with high naturalness. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. Though no species with particular interest are found along this LR, its high-level natural setting of streams is considered as high in sensitivity due to its low ability to accommodate change.

· LR 5.1d is also a natural rocky stream located at uphill, merged with LR 5.1c and converted to LR 5.1g, with a total length of 100m and 5m width, as it has very similar character with LR 5.1c, which is well managed due to low accessibility at uphill area. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is high because watercourses are undisturbed with high naturalness. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. Therefore, LR 5.1d is considered as high in sensitivity.

· LR 5.1e is located at the west side of HPR site, which convert to semi-natural stream LR 5.1i entering HPR site area. It is a natural rocky stream with 370m in length with 3.5m width. No species of particular interest are found. The watercourses of the LR are undisturbed with high naturalness. Continuous waterflow was observed to be during the wet season and became intermittent during dry season. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is high in consideration of its high naturalness and low disturbance with human activities nearby. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. LR 5.1e is considered as high in sensitivity.

· LR 5.1m is a natural stream located at grassland between LR 5.1a and 5.1e. It is approximately 170m in length and 3.5m width. This LR is difficult to access as it is located in uphill area, and therefore well-preservation due to limited human activities. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is high because watercourses are undisturbed with high naturalness. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. LR 5.1m is considered as high in sensitivity.

· LR 5.2a is a natural rocky stream located at hillside woodland at the middle of proposed Road L7 area. It is relatively short compared to other natural streams, with only 88m in length and 2.5m width. The LR is found as dry channels without any waterflow even nor stagnant pool during wet and dry seasons. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium because there is no observable waterflow and short in length. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. LR 5.2a is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 5.2b is also a natural rocky stream next to LR 5.1a, with length of 87m and 2.5m width. It is connected to semi-natural stream LR 5.2c. Small water pools were observed at some locations of the LR, which is relatively dry. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium because there is no observable waterflow and short in length. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. Therefore, LR 5.2b is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 5.2d is a natural stream located at hillside woodland at the upper part of proposed Road L7 flowing towards and stop right beside the western boundary of HPR site. It is approximately 310m in length with 3.5m width. The LR is found as dry channels without any waterflow even nor stagnant pool during wet and dry seasons. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to no waterflow is observed. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. LR 5.2d is considered as high in sensitivity due to its low ability to accommodate change.

· LR 5.3a is located at hillside which it consists of 2 stream channels, and they merge to form a short section of downstream which a small part would then enter the middle of proposed Road L7 area. This natural rocky stream has total 628m in length and width of 3.5m. Small water pools were observed at some locations of the LR. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to no waterflow is observed. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. And therefore LR 5.3a is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 5.3b is a natural stream located at the north side of LR 5.3a, with a small part of downstream entering the middle of proposed Road L7. It is around 260m in length and 3.5m in width. Small water pools were observed at some locations of the LR. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to no waterflow is observed. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. With similar character to LR 5.3a, LR 5.3b is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 5.4a is a natural rocky stream located at the west side of end of proposed Road L7 which then converted to semi-natural stream LR 5.4b towards the south of LR 6 – Urban area. LR 5.4 also serves to irrigate the nearby agricultural land. With 420m length and width of around 5.5m, continuous water flow in wet season and intermittent flow in dry season is found within the LR. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is high due to notable waterflow is observed with high natural setting. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. LR 5.4a is therefore considered as high in sensitivity.

· LR 5.8a is a natural stream located at north west part of LR 4b – Plantation Woodland. It is about 500m in length which comprised of 2 streams channels intersect and divert again, forming an “X” shaped layout. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. Due to this location is hardly accessed by public, the natural setting of the LR is well-preserved, therefore, the quality and maturity of the LR is high. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. LR 5.8a is considered as high in sensitivity due to the high quality and maturity and low ability to accommodate change.

· LR 5.8b is a natural stream located at north east part of LR 4b – Plantation Woodland. It is about 135m in length. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is high due to high level of naturalness and well-preserved. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. LR 5.8b is considered as high in sensitivity due to the high quality and maturity and low ability to accommodate change.

· LR 5.8c is a natural stream located at centre of LR 4b – Plantation Woodland. It is approximately 200m in length with negligible disturbance to its natural setting. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is high due to its highly-preserved natural setting. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. LR 5.8c is considered as high in sensitivity due to due to the high quality and maturity and low ability to accommodate change.

· LR 5.8d is a natural stream located at lower centre of LR 4b – Plantation Woodland. It is approximately 230m in length which consist of 2 streams channel which merge to form a very short section of downstream towards Shek Pai Tau Road. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. With high-level naturalness with limited human disturbance, therefore, the quality and maturity of the LR is high. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. LR 5.8d is considered as high in sensitivity due to the high quality and maturity and low ability to accommodate change.

· LR 5.8e is a natural stream located at southern part of LR 4b – Plantation Woodland. It is approximately 85m in length which is relatively short compared to other natural streams in this hillside area. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is high due to the high quality of natural setting. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. LR 8.1e is considered as high in sensitivity due to its due to the high quality and maturity and low ability to accommodate change.

Semi-natural Streams

· LR 5.1f is a semi-natural stream with 812m in length and 6m width. It passes through the central area of HPR site, adjacent to agricultural land which catches waterflow and serving as the lower course for natural streams LR 5.1a and 5.1b. It has slight to moderate human modifications for drainage and agricultural purposes. This type of semi-natural streams is common in Hong Kong, and have limited landscape elements and no species of particular interest are found. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium because the artificial modification and notable waterflow are observed. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. Therefore, LR 5.1f is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 5.1g is a semi-natural stream with length of 716m and 3.5m width. It catches waterflow from natural stream LR 5.1c and 5.1d, which flows between LR 1f – Villa Pinada and LR 1g - Chung Shan Area, and transform to LR 5.1k entering HPR site. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium because the artificial modification and notable waterflow are observed. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. LR 5.1g is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 5.1i is the lower course of natural stream LR 5.1e which small portion of its downstream entering west side of HPR site. With 92m length and 2m in width, though this LR is relatively short, without any species of particular interest. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium because the artificial modification and notable waterflow are observed. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. With consideration of the declining of semi-natural stream due to channelization works for drainage and flood control, LR 5.1i is considered as10. medium in sensitivity.

· LR 5.2c is a very short section of semi-natural stream, which serves as the lower course of natural stream LR 5.2b. Roughly around 75m in length, with very limited vegetation, and no species with particular interest are found. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the increasing extend of channelization works to this semi-natural stream. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. LR 5.2c is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 5.4b is also a short section of semi-natural stream which serves as the lower course of LR 5.4a. Roughly around 175m in length, it has limited vegetation with no species of particular interest are found. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the increasing extend of channelization works to this semi-natural stream. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. With very similar quality and rarity compared to LR 5.2c, LR 5.4b is also considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 5.4c is a semi natural stream located at the south side of LR 5.2f – Kwong Shan Tsuen Open Storage. It is approximately 190m in length, with upstream located at woodland while its downstream located in urban area. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the riparian plants along the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the increasing extend of channelization works to this semi-natural stream. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. This LR is common in local and regional context, with artificial modification and without any rare or precious species found, LR 5.4c is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 5.4d is a semi natural stream at the southern end of LR 4a - Mixed Woodland. It is around 170m in length. The rarity of the LR is medium due to the consideration of increasing channelization works to this type of stream. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the increasing extend of channelization works to this semi-natural stream. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. LR 5.4d is considered as medium in sensitivity due to its medium quality and rarity in local and regional context.

Channelised Watercourses

· LR 5.1h is channelized sections of watercourses at downstream, which catch water from LR 5.1k and 5.1l at northern side of SHR extension site and connecting to downstream of semi-natural stream LR 5.1f. It is about 500m in length. LR 5.1h has no major vegetation coverage, which is highly artificial with low quality and rarity of landscape elements. The rarity, quality and maturity of the LR is low due to only some weeds or self-seed pioneers growing from cracks or climbing on the concrete banks are found in this LR. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. This LR is highly adaptive and hence, and with prominent water pollution, its overall sensitivity is considered as low.

· LR 5.1j is a short-channelized section act as drainage for village, serving as the lower course for semi-natural stream LR 5.1i. It is approximately 90m in length. The rarity, quality and maturity of the LR is low due to only some weeds or self-seed pioneers growing from cracks or climbing on the concrete banks are found in this LR. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. This LR has very limited landscape resources and low importance due to its small size and prominent water pollution. LR 5.1j is considered as low in sensitivity.

· LR 5.1k is passing through SHR site extension, serving as continuations of the semi-natural streams LR 5.1g, collecting drain water from the hillside woodland areas. It is about 550m in length, which is readily re-creatable with no significant landscape linkage to surrounding environment was identified. The rarity, quality and maturity of the LR is low due to only some weeds or self-seed pioneers growing from cracks or climbing on the concrete banks are found in this LR. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. Due to the above consideration, as well as water pollution commonly occur in this type of watercourse, LR 5.1k is considered as low in sensitivity.

· LR 5.1l is pass through SHR extension site, which collect storm water from the villages they pass through. It is about 400m in length, with limited vegetation and very common human disturbance which caused water pollution in this area. The rarity, quality and maturity of the LR is low due to only some weeds or self-seed pioneers growing from cracks or climbing on the concrete banks are found in this LR. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. LR 5.1l is therefore considered as low in sensitivity.

· LR 5.5 is located at Tsz Tin Road, which is an isolated channelized watercourse with approximately 400m in length. This LR has have little vegetation along the banks. As it is located near the village area, there is prominent water pollution due to domestic discharge. The rarity, quality and maturity of the LR is low due to only some weeds or self-seed pioneers growing from cracks or climbing on the concrete banks are found in this LR. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. LR 5.5 is therefore considered as low in sensitivity.

· LR 5.6 is passing through LR 1c - Kei Lun Wai, which are isolated channels receiving water through underground drainage systems, with around 350m in length. It has very similar character with LR 5.5 due to their similar setting. The rarity, quality and maturity of the LR is low due to only some weeds or self-seed pioneers growing from cracks or climbing on the concrete banks are found in this LR. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. LR 5.6 is considered as low in sensitivity.

· LR 5.7 is Tuen Mun River Channel in parallel to Tuen Mun Road. It passes through LR 6b – Key Transport Road along Castle Peak Road, with an extension towards the east along Fuk Hang Road. LR 5.7 is up to 2,250m in length, which has limited vegetation. The water quality is poor with undesirable smell due to prominent water pollution. LR 5.7 has been established for around 50 years. The rarity, quality and maturity of the LR is low due to only some weeds or self-seed pioneers growing from cracks or climbing on the concrete banks are found in this LR. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. Due to its highly artificial structure with re-creatable character, LR 5.7 is considered as low in sensitivity.

(6) LR6 – Urban Area: This LR is generally highly developed with large infrastructure (e.g. the main Castle Peak Road and light rail network) as well as a higher concentration of taller buildings such as within Siu Hong court and Po Tin Estate. This LR is therefore sub-divided into four (4) groups, includes: LR 6a – Residential Blocks, LR 6b – Key Transport Routes, LR 6c – Public Facilities and LR 6d – Industrial Blocks. No species of particular interest is found in this LR.

· LR 6a – Residential Blocks (1,078,860m²) includes residential high-rise areas which have some landscaping of their open space, with approximately 800 – 920 nos. of relatively young trees. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the LR consists of a considerable amount of young trees. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. With consideration of is relatively high nos. of trees in this LR, LR 6a is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 6b – Key Transport Routes (464,042m²) has limited vegetation, mostly roadside trees which consist of around 190 – 230 nos. of trees. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is low as it consists of few nos. of young trees. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. LR 6b is considered as low in sensitivity.

· LR 6c - Public Facilities (478,445m²) includes hospitals and schools, also with some parks and playgrounds which may include richer vegetation in these particular areas. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the trees within the LR are relatively mature. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. There are estimated to be 700 – 770 nos. of trees in this LR and LR 6c is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 6d – Industrial Blocks (128,000m²) has limited vegetation, mostly roadside planting which consist of around 40 nos. of trees. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is low due to the LR consists of few nos. of young trees. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. Due to its low nos. of trees, LR 6d is considered as low in sensitivity.

(7) LR7 – Construction Site (176,847m²): This LR represents areas where development is currently underway (e.g. for Tuen Mun Area 54 Project). This LR has no species of particular interest and approximately 300 – 320 nos. of trees are found. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is low due to the trees within the LR is dominant with young trees. The LR has high ability to accommodate change. This LR could be able to accommodate change easily, therefore, LR7 is considered as low in sensitivity.

(8) LR8 – Shrubland Grassland Mosaic: This LR represents a continuous shrub-grassland mosaic to the northwest of the Assessment Area that falls mainly within the Tsing Shan Firing Range boundary and largely in good condition. This LR is subdivided into two (2) groups, include: the LR 8a – West Grassland Mosaic and LR 8b South West Grassland Mosaic. LR 8a and LR 8b are actually connected as a continuous habitat, but being separated due to the assessment boundary for ease of review and therefore they have very similar landscape character. This LR is semi-natural which is very common in Hong Kong with estimated age of over 20 years.

· LR 8a (503,000m²) is dominated by species include native trees like Ficus hispida, Ficus microcarpa, Celtis sinensis, Macaranga tanarius var. tomentosa, and fruit trees such as Dimocarpus longan, they are ranging from 4m to 12m height and 0.1 – 1m in DBH. Approximately 1,100 – 1,400 nos. of relatively mature trees are located within LR 8a. Also, there are around 3-5 nos. of Aquilaria sinensis, and 4 nos. of Diospyros vaccinioides identified in this LR. This is a very common habitat in Hong Kong, with low rarity due to most of the trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the maturity of tree group within the LR is relative mature. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. LR 8a is considered as medium in sensitivity.

· LR 8b (71,188m²) has very similar composition like LR 8a, with around 170 – 240 nos. of trees located. The rarity of the LR is low due to trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LR is medium due to the maturity of tree group within the LR is dominant with young trees. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. No tree of particular interest was recorded in LR 8b, LR 8b is considered as medium in sensitivity as well.

(9) LCA 1 – Tuen Mun North Rural Fringe (1,639,471m²): The mosaic of villages, open storage, agricultural land and woodland framed by the slopes of the Castle Peak range are considered to be an example of rural fringe landscape. This LCA contrasts distinctly with intensive urban development of Tuen Mun nearby, given its low rise, rural, open aspect with different landscape resources, and the setting of the foothills behind.

Approximately 3,765 - 4,155 trees are located in this LCA scattered throughout the village areas and in the associated agricultural lands/ orchards. They include nine (9) large trees with DBH ≥1 m: six (6) Ficus microcarpa throughout the LCA, two (2) Ficus elastica to the north of Villa Pinada and one (1) Litchi chinensis within the SHR site area. And around 3-5 nos. Aquilaria sinensis are located at the northern part of this LCA adjacent to LCA 3.

This area is generally flat (level ranging from around +10.0mPD to +20.0mPD), in regional scale, it is slightly gradient from the northern side (from Fortune Villa +9.6) to the southern side (near Ming Wong Garden +18.8mPD to +19.2mPD).

The rarity of the LCA is low due to most of the trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LCA is medium. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. Although there are a high number of trees in this LCA, they are scattered among village houses, open storage/ workshop and construction site and overall, LCA 1 is considered as medium in sensitivity.

(10) LCA 2 – Tuen Mun North Urban Area (2,155,795m²): Much of this LCA is made up of road and light rail networks within the south/ southeast of the Assessment Area. It also includes a number of high-rise buildings, facilities (e.g. a hospital) and industrial blocks. Residential blocks include high-rise structures, medium rise character and mixed structure heights. The topography of this area is generally flat which occupies with mostly residential buildings and infrastructures (Lingnan University & Parkland Villas in the Eastern side and Po tin Estate in the Western side).

The rarity of the LCA is low due to most of the trees within the LR are common species. The quality and maturity of the LCA is medium. The LR has medium ability to accommodate change. Generally, this LCA is highly developed with reasonable tolerance to change and limited soft landscape. Approximately 1,750 – 2,000 trees are estimated to be located in across the whole of this LCA. Overall, LCA 2 sensitivity is considered as medium.

(11) LCA 3 – Castle Peak Foothill (1,474,532m²): This LCA encompasses the foothills of Castle Peak, and is mainly covered by mixed woodland, offering a large green, natural aspect. The levels of Castle Peak ranged from up to +180 at the northern-west side (edge of 500m assessment boundary) and connected to the western side of LCA 1-Tuen Mun North Rural Fringe Landscape Character Area at around level +20mPD.

This LCA contains approximately 4,100 - 4,900 trees including two (2) large trees: one (1) Ficus microcarpa and one (1) Melaleuca cajuputi subsp. cumingiana with DBH ≥1 m are located in this LCA 3. Most of the Aquilaria sinensis and other identified floral species with conservation interest are located in this LCA. Refer to APPENDIX 10B for locations and additional details.

The rarity of the LCA is medium due to the LR consists of trees which is protected under Cap. 586 and floral species with conservation interest. The quality and maturity of the LCA is high. The LR has low ability to accommodate change. Overall, LCA 3 is considered as high in sensitivity.

(12) LR2c (1,531m²) and LR3a(770m²) in DP1: Within DP1, over 50% of the DP1 is LR 2c and only few areas are LR 3a (please refer to Figure 10.5f). Both the LRs within DP1 have limited greenery, not more than 5 trees identified for each LRs. The rarity of both LRs within DP1 are low due to trees within DP1 is common species. The quality and maturity of both LRs are low due to DP1 only consists of few nos. of trees. The LRs within DP1 have high ability to accommodate change. With the above considerations, the sensitivity of both LRs within DP1 are considered as low.

10.5.9 All LRs and LCAs within the assessment area are presented in Table 10.10 and the LRs for DP1 are presented in Table 10.11 along with a summary of their sensitivity. It should be noted that unless otherwise specified in the text, LRs/LCAs are not considered to have any statutory or regulatory limitations/requirements relating to them. With regards to special elements which are rare or important these are related to trees of large size listed in the table. APPENDIX 10B provides further details of all the trees of large size, with further analysis of their tree form and amenity value

Table 10.10 Sensitivities and Relevant Dimensions of LRs and LCAs within the Assessment Area

LR/ LCA Code	Name	Sub-division	Quality	Maturity	Significance of the change in local & regional context	Ability to accommodate to change	Approx. No. of Trees	Importance & rarity of special landscape elements	Species of conservation/ particular interest	Sensitivity
LR1	Village/ Low-rise Residential Development	LR 1a – Siu Hang Tsuen	Medium	Medium	Medium	Medium	340 - 380	Low	N/A	Medium
		LR 1c – Kai Lun Wai Village					350 - 400
		LR 1d – San Hing Tsuen					770 - 850
		LR 1e – Tuen Mun San Tsuen					~120
		LR 1f – Villa Pinada					60 - 75
		LR 1b – Tsz Tin Tsuen	High	High	Medium	Low	250 - 300	Low	#5, #6, #7 & #12	High
		LR 1g – Chung Shan Area					20 - 40		#10 & #11
LR2	Open Storage/ Workshop	LR 2b – HPR Workshops (Peripheral greening)	Low	Low	Low	High	50 - 60	Low	N/A	Low
		LR 2d – San Hing Tsuen Open Storage					50 - 60
		LR 2e – Tong Hang Road Open Storage					~20
		LR 2f – Kwong Shan Tsuen Open Storage					5 - 10
		LR 2a – HPR Container Terminal	Medium	Medium		Medium	190 - 230	Low		Medium
		LR 2c – HPR Workshops with Scattered Greening					240 - 300		CEDD-T62
LR3	Agricultural Land/ Orchard	LR 3a – Actively Cultivated Land	High	High	High	Low	850 - 900	High	CEDD-T23 & T503 (3-4) Aquilaria sinensis	High
		LR 3b – Abandoned Land	Medium	Medium	Medium	Medium	160 - 170	Low	N/A	Medium
LR4	Hillside Woodland	LR 4a – Mixed Woodland	High	High	High	Low	2,250 – 2,550	High	T589 & #9 (30 – 35) Aquilaria sinensis (3) Pyrenaria spectabilis (5) Geodorum densiflorum (1) Diospyros vaccinioides	High
		LR 4b – Plantation Woodland	Medium	Medium	Medium	Medium	390 - 450	Low	N/A	Medium
		LR 4c – Mature Secondary Woodland	High	High	High	Low	200- 220	High	(20) Aquilaria sinensis (23) Pyrenaria spectabilis (14) Camellia crapnelliana (1) Rhodoleia championii (1) Gleditsia australis (1) Diospyros vaccinioides	High
LR5	Natural/ Semi-natural Stream	LR 5.1a – 5.1e, 5.1m, 5.2d, 5.4a & 5.8a – 5.8e	Medium to High	Medium to High	High	Low	-	Medium to High	(28) Nepenthes mirabilis	High
		LR 5.2a, 5.2b, 5.3a & 5.3b	Medium	Medium	Medium	Medium		Medium	N/A	Medium
		LR 5.1f, 5.1g, 5.1i, 5.2c & 5.4b – 5.4d	Medium	Medium	Medium			Medium		Medium
	Channelized Watercourse	LR5.1h, 5.1j – 5.1l & 5.5 – 5.7	Low	Low	Low	High	-	Low		Low
LR6	Urban Area	LR 6a – Residential Block	Medium	Medium	Low	Medium	800 - 920	Low	N/A	Medium
		LR 6b – Key Transport Route	Low	Low	Low	High	190 - 230	Low		Low
		LR 6c – Public Facilities	Medium	Medium	Low	Medium	700 - 770	Low		Medium
		LR 6d – Industrial Blocks	Low	Low	Low	High	~40	Low		Low
LR7	Construction Site		Low	Low	Low	High	300 - 320	Low	Low	Low
LR8	Shrubland-Grassland Mosaic	LR 8a – West Grassland Mosaic	Medium	Medium	Medium	Medium	1,100 – 1,400	Low	(3-5) Aquilaria sinensis (4) Diospyros vaccinioides	Medium
		LR 8b – South West Grassland Mosaic	Medium	Medium	Medium	Medium	170 - 240	Low	N/A	Medium
LCA1	Tuen Mun North Rural Fringe		Medium	Medium	Medium	Medium	3,765 – 4,155	Low	CEDD-T23, CEDD-T62, T503, #5, #6, #7 #10, #11 & #12 (3-4) Aquilaria sinensis	Medium
LCA2	Tuen Mun North Urban Area		Medium	Medium	Low	Medium	1,750 – 2,000	Low	N/A	Medium
LCA3	Castle Peak Foothill		High	High	High	Low	4,100 – 4,900	Medium	T589 & #9 (59) Aquilaria sinensis (26) Pyrenaria spectabilis (14) Camellia crapnelliana (1) Rhodoleia championii (5) Geodorum densiflorum (1) Gleditsia australis (6) Diospyros vaccinioides (28) Nepenthes mirabilis	High

Table 10.11 Sensitivities and Relevant Dimensions of LRs for DP1

LR/ LCA Code	Name	Sub-division	Quality	Maturity	Significance of the change in local & regional context	Ability to accommodate to change	Approx. No. of Trees	Importance & rarity of special landscape elements	Species of conservation/ particular interest	Sensitivity
LR2	Open Storage/ Workshop	LR 2c – HPR Workshops with Scattered Greening	Low	Low	Low	High	<5	Low	N/A	Low
LR3	Agricultural Land/ Orchard	LR 3a – Actively Cultivated Land	Low	Low	Medium	High	<5	Low	N/A	Low

Visual Analysis of Key Visually Sensitive Receivers

10.5.10 The identified Visual Envelope is illustrated in Figure 10.9a and visually sensitive receivers (VSRs) have been selected to represent key public views. They have been selected taking into account views to the proposed Project from readily accessible, key strategic and popular local vantage points in the area, such as pedestrian nodes, prominent travel routes e.g. MTR/ light railway, popular outdoor activities e.g. along trails, and popular tourist attractions e.g. Monastery, and have considered both those visual sensitive receivers close to the Proposed Project and those further away. It is worth noting that the hill ranges to the west of the proposed Project lie within a Firing Range where access to the public is limited, however further south, a VSR from near Castle Peak (VSR11) has been selected to represent public views from this hill range, as the Castle Peak trail is a relatively popular trail when this area is open to the public.

10.5.11 Among fourteen (14) VSRs, VSR3 & VSR6 are taken at the south side of HPR site facing north-east direction (2 nos.); VSR12 is taken at the north side of SHR Site Extension facing South direction (1 no.); VSR1 is taken at the north-east side of SHR Site Extension facing south-west direction (1 no.); VSR2, VSR9 & VSR13 are taken at the north-east side of SHR site facing west direction (3 nos.); VSR7 & VSR10 are taken at the south-east side of SHR site facing north-west direction (2 nos.); VSR4, VSR8 & VSR 14 are taken at the South side of SHR site facing the north direction (3 nos.); VSR5 is taken at south side of SHR site facing north-east direction (1 no.); while VSR11 is taken at south-west side of proposed Road L7 alignment facing north-east direction (1 no.). The height of viewing point ranged from +7 mPD (VSR8 from Tsing Chung Koon Road) to +370 mPD (VSR11 from trail between Castle Peak and Por Lo Shan). Most of the VSRs are at ground level, except for VSRs 4, 7, 9 & 13 are taken on raised platform: footbridge, MTR station, viewing platform and West Railway respectively. As the project site is bounded by mountain on both eastern and western sides, therefore most of the visually sensitive receivers could perceive the ridgelines in different visual extent, especially the existing VSRs 1, 6, 9, 11 & 12 could enjoy a broad panorama of mountain view. On the other hand, as the project site is located at the northern part of Tuen Mun which is far away from waterfront, therefore all the indicated VSRs are not able to cover the harbour.

Visual analysis of key visually sensitive receivers (VSRs) is detailed below and Table 10.12 summarises the sensitivities of each.

· VSR1 from Car Park, Tuen Tsz Wai. This VSR is located in car park area in Tuen Tsz Wai which commonly used by residents for parking. These village areas are a mix of low-rise village houses with intermittent greening, facilities like playground and small sport field, and old architectures like temple and ancestral shrine. The existing view enjoys a low angle of panorama view to hill range ridgeline to the north-west. Type of receivers in this area are mostly residents in Tuen Tsz Wai and adjacent village areas. This type of car park/ open area is common which could be freely accessed.

The proposed development would be relatively close (VSR1 is approximately 200-250 m from high rise elements of the proposed development) and permanent. Though at ground level, this area is surrounding by planting, the proposed development is still apparent due to close distance, blocking most of the existing hill range ridgeline. The sensitivity of viewers at this VSR is considered high.

· VSR2 from Public Open Area between Tuen Mun San Tsuen and Botania Villa. This VSR is located near Tuen Mun San Tsuen and is this public open space is frequented by residents in and around Tuen Mun San Tsuen. Type of receivers are mostly residents in this low-rise residential area. VSR2 is approximately 400 m from the high-rise elements of the proposed development which would be a permanent new feature in the view but at ground level are not prominent in the background, due to other closer buildings in the existing view being more prominent and some landscaping screening the view in a small degree. The sensitivity of viewers at this VSR is considered low.

· VSR3 from Piu Lin Garden, Siu Hang Tsuen. This VSR represents the public views from e.g. bus stops, the main streets and common open space for residents in and around Piu Lin Garden and Siu Hang Tsuen, with medium frequency of view. This area is freely accessed by residents. VSR3 is approximately 550m from the high-rise elements of the proposed development which would be a permanent new feature in the view. At ground level closer structures and trees in the existing view partly block views towards the Project. The sensitivity of viewers at this VSR is considered low.

· VSR4 from Tsing Lun Road footbridge, near Siu Hong Court. This VSR represents the public utilizing Tsing Lun Road close to the high-rise elements of the proposed development. Tsing Lun Road and footbridge are freely accessed by public with pedestrian flow, and therefore this view is perceived mostly in mobile status, with shorter duration of view. The existing views west and north are partially blocked by other new high-rise structures and they have limited glimpse views of the hillsides in the background. Due to proximity of the proposed Project and the fact the views will be permanently affected, the sensitivity of viewers at this VSR is considered medium.

· VSR5 from Kei Lun Wai Children’s Playground, representing viewers of Kei Lun Wai, especially kids and elderly lives in this area who utilize the playground for leisure. Due to the low density of village houses in this area, the playground has low frequency of usage. As the proposed development buildings are not prominent in the background due to closer buildings in existing view like Siu Hong Court, and therefore a restricted degree of view. The sensitivity of viewers at this VSR is considered low.

· VSR6 from Po Tong Ha. Representing viewers in the low-lying village area around Po Tong Ha who from public areas will have views of both the Hong Po Road and San Hing Road developments. This type of pathway in village is commonly used, while residents commonly wander around open area, with a considerable duration of stay. These viewers currently have good views of the hillside ridgelines and likely value their views highly. The proposed new development is close by (approximately 250 m from VSR6) and will be a permanent change in their viewing experience. The sensitivity of viewers at this VSR is considered high.

· VSR7 from Raised Public Road Outside Siu Hong MTR Station. Representing viewers who will be travelling on the MTR, their sensitivity is reduced due to transient nature and less perceived value of their views although the new development will be a permanent new feature. The existing view is composed of high-rise on the left while a range of ridgeline on the right which is partially blocked by pylons, which has a mixed quality of visual composition. People who pass through this area are mostly entering or leaving MTR station, due to the very short duration of stay of pedestrian in this location, the sensitivity of viewers at this VSR is considered low.

· VSR8 from Tsing Chung Koon Road. Representing viewers near Ching Chung Koon, along the main public Tsing Chung Koon Road. The composition of view includes medium rise building on two sides. This VSR is over 1,000 m from the high-rise elements of the proposed new development and views at street level are largely blocked by other structures such as Tuen Mun Nursing Hospital. Viewers are mostly pedestrian or people going to adjacent public facilities/ institutions, which has a relatively short duration of staying. The sensitivity of viewers at this VSR is considered low.

· VSR9 from Miu Fat Monastery Public Viewing Platform. Representing viewers specifically coming to this monastery for the views, the proposed new development will be a permanent, mid-distant change in their viewing experience but these viewers highly value their view. Considering that viewers in this VSR are mainly worshippers, which is relatively small group of people and stays indoor for worshipping most of the time, thus, the sensitivity of viewers at this VSR is considered medium.

· VSR10 from Tuen Mun Path, Route 1. Representing public viewers participating in outdoor activities along the trails. There are good existing, panoramic views to the west/ north-west including the high ridgelines in the background and more high-rise Tuen Mun area in the mid-view. As the view distance from Tuen Mun Path, Route 1 is not so visible to the proposed development (over 1,000m). Also, the proposed development is blocked by the existing development in Tuen Mun. The sensitivity of viewer is considered low.

· VSR11 from Trail between Castle Peak and Por Lo Shan. Representing viewers participating in outdoor activities along the trails, with good views to the north over the whole Tuen Mun north area, hill ranges to the west and east and distant views of Shenzhen. Although approximately 3,000 m from the proposed development, given the good panoramic nature of existing views, viewers at this VSR are likely to value the quality of their views and their sensitivity is considered high.

· VSR12 from Chung Shan Hillside with Graves. Representing viewers coming to visit grave sites as well as those around the Chung Shan area. Views from grave sites are largely perceived to be valuable which viewers are so close to the proposed development. However, considering the low frequency of tomb-sweeping, which is around 2 -3 times a year and duration of staying is short, the sensitivity of viewers at this VSR is considered medium.

· VSR13 from West Railway heading south-west. Representing viewers travelling on the MTR. Although the view is good and panoramic, views will be transient and less valuable than static views and would have a very short duration to perceive this view. The sensitivity of viewers at this VSR is considered low.

· VSR14 from Hong Po Road Roundabout. Representing viewers, mainly drivers who drive from Tsing Lun Road to Hong Po Road and the PDA via roundabout. The existing view is composed of roundabout with planting at the central area, with mountain ridgeline at the left side of background, with pylons at two sides, village houses from distant front view obstructed by a group of trees near the roadside. This roundabout has constant traffic flow with intermediate population of viewers which stay in a relatively short duration of time. The quality of view is fair with a broad view of mixed visual components. The sensitivity of viewers at this VSR is considered medium.

Table 10.12 Sensitivity of Public Viewers from Visually Sensitive Receivers

VSR	Description	Population of viewers (Large/Intermediate/ Few/Very Few)	Quality of existing view (Good/Fair/Poor)	Direction of Main views/ Availability of Alternative Views (Yes/No)	Frequency of View (very frequent/ frequent/ occasional/rare)	Degree of Visibility (Full/Partial/ Glimpsed)	Sensitivity (Low, Medium, High)
1	View from Car Park, Tuen Tsz Wai	Intermediate	Good	South-west, Yes	Frequent	Full	High
2	View from Public Open Area between Tuen Mun San Tsuen and Botania Villa	Intermediate	Fair	West, Yes	Occasional	Glimpsed	Low
3	View from Piu Lin Garden, Siu Hang Tsuen	Intermediate	Fair	North-east, Yes	Frequent	Partial	Low
4	View from Tsing Lun Road footbridge	Intermediate	Poor	North, No	Occasional	Glimpsed	Medium
5	View from Kei Lun Wai Children’s Playground	Few	Poor	North-east, Yes	Occasional	Glimpsed	Low
6	View from Po Tong Ha	Intermediate	Fair	North-east, Yes	Frequent	Partial	High
7	View from Raised Public Road Outside Siu Hong MTR Station	Intermediate	Fair	North-west, Yes	Occasional	Partial	Low
8	View from Tsing Chung Koon Road	Few	Poor	North, No	Occasional	Glimpsed	Low
9	View from Miu Fat Monastery Public Viewing Platform	Few	Good	West, Yes	Occasional	Full	Medium
10	View from Tuen Mun Path, Route 1	Few	Fair	North-west, Yes	Occasional	Partial	Low
11	View from Trail between Castle Peak and Por Lo Shan	Few	Good	North-east, Yes	Occasional	Full	High
12	View from Chung Shan Hillside with Graves	Very Few	Fair	South, Yes	Rare	Partial	Medium
13	View from West Railway heading South-west	Intermediate	Fair	West, Yes	Occasional	Full	Low
14^(a)	View from Hong Po Road Roundabout	Intermediate	Fair	North-east, Yes	Occasional	Full	Medium

Note: (a) This VSR is selected to represent viewers, mainly drivers who drive from Tsing Lun Road to Hong Po Road and the PDA via roundabout for DP1.

10.6 Identification of Potential Sources of Landscape Impact & Visual Impact

10.6.1 The Project will have various potential landscape impact and visual impact during construction and operation as described below.

Construction Phase

10.6.2 During the construction phase of the Project, potential impacts could result from the following:

· Site clearance and tree removal (i.e. felling and transplantation);

· Site formation works including excavation, concreting, backfilling and formation of man-made slopes and construction of retaining structures, particularly at HPR Site;

· The existing ground level of HPR Site ranges from approximately +14 mPD to +40 mPD, with the proposed site formation level ranging from approximately +8 mPD to +21 mPD;

· The existing ground level of SHR Site Extension ranges from approximately +9 mPD to +16 mPD, with the proposed site formation level ranging from approximately +9.8 mPD to +12.2 mPD;

· The existing ground level of SHR Site ranges from approximately +5.3 mPD to +14.8 mPD, with the propose site formation level ranging from approximately +6.0 mPD to +12.0 mPD;

· Temporary access to construction sites;

· Open-cut excavation and reinstatement of affected areas due to the associated infrastructure works;

· Trenchless construction, in certain areas to be finalised, when laying the proposed sewers and rising mains crossing major roads, road junctions or at sensitive locations or where open-cut excavation is not feasible;

· Presence and operation of construction vehicles and machinery;

· Stockpiling areas;

· Construction of footbridge;

· Modification of watercourse

· Retaining structure;

· Noise barrier;

· Landscape treatment on man-made slope & retaining structures; and

· Potential night-time lighting if required.

· Layering of fresh water main and salt water main along existing road

Operation Phase

10.6.3 During the operation phase of the Project, potential landscape impact and visual impact could result from the following:

· Existence and operation of new structures such as high-rise buildings, sewage pumping station (SPS), public transport interchanges (PTIs), service reservoirs, sewerage, waterworks and drainage infrastructure, etc.

· Existence and operation of proposed roads and associated noise barriers; and

· Increase in ambient light level at night due to new buildings and proposed road lighting. In addition, the impact of the SPS, PTIs, fresh & salt water service reservoirs have been taken into consideration for this assessment.

10.7 Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment before Mitigation Measures

Landscape

Magnitude of Landscape Change at both Construction and Operation Phases

10.7.1 This section describes how the potential impacts identified in Section 10.6 would affect the landscape. Table 10.13 then summarises the magnitude of change experienced by each broad LR and LCA during construction and operation within assessment area, while Table 10.14 summaries the magnitude of change for LRs due to the DP1 for SHR SPS.

Landscape Resources

10.7.2 LR 1 - Village/ Low-rise Residential Development: This LR will be impacted by the construction and operation works at HPR site, SHR Site and SHR Site Extension and along the proposed road network. Most of the key village areas identified in the LR will be retained. The continuous topography would therefore be divided due to the proposed site formation works, which would be less connected. This LR has relatively fair compatibility with the Project, changing from a rural area with some low-rise development to an urban, high rise environment, however with much of the core areas will be retained. This will be a permanent conversion into more densely populated zones over a reasonably large and fragmented area with some tree removal required. All identified trees of large size (#5, #6, #7, #10, #11 & #12) in this LR are not affected by project footprint and would be retained in-situ.

LR 1a - Siu Hang Tsuen will be enclosed by the proposed road and have high-rise developments to the north. As it is not overlapped with proposed site area, no trees would be affected. And therefore, it is considered to experience negligible magnitude of change for both construction and operation phase.

LR 1b - Tsz Tin Tsuen will be enclosed by the proposed road and have high-rise developments to the north. The north edge of this LR would be affected with SHR site extension, around 40 – 50 nos. of trees would be affected. In consideration of its high sensitivity, it is considered to experience intermediate magnitude of change for both construction and operation phase.

LR 1c – Kai Lun Wai Village is not overlapped with proposed site area but would still be slightly affected by infrastructure works on north edge. As the affected area is very limited, which no trees would be affected, it is considered to experience negligible magnitude of change for both construction and operation phase.

The north side of LR 1d - San Hing Tsuen would be affected in a small extent by SHR Site and SHR Site Extension, and small part of infrastructure works as well. Around 20 – 25 nos. of trees would be affected. In consideration of its high sensitivity, it is considered to experience intermediate magnitude of change for both construction and operation phase.

LR 1e - Tuen Mun San Tsuen will not be affected by the proposed development. Therefore, it is considered to experience negligible magnitude of change for both construction and operation phase.

LR 1f – Villa Pinada would be slightly affected by the site formation works at the edge area which may cause minor changes to its existing topography although no trees would be affected, it is considered to experience small magnitude of change for both construction and operation phase.

LR 1g – Chung Shan Area will be affected by SHR site extension, with around 20 nos. of trees affected, which cover almost all of its vegetation. As half of LR 1g would be significantly changed, also in consideration of its high sensitivity, it is considered to experience large magnitude of change for both construction and operation phase.

10.7.3 LR 2 - Open Storage/ Workshop: During the operation phase, this LR will be converted to residential, educational or social spaces. This LR has relatively good compatibility with the Project and has an ability to be easily relocated or rebuilt with low value of existing vegetation among the area. Only LR 2e - Tong Hang Road Open Storage and LR 2f - Kwong Shan Tsuen Open Storage are unaffected, and therefore LRs 2e & 2f are identified with negligible magnitude of change for both construction and operation phase.

Almost whole LR 2a – HPR Container Terminal with limited greening would be in conflict with HPR site, there would be around 190 – 230 nos. of trees affected. Due to its medium sensitivity and considerable numbers of trees affected, it is considered to experience Large magnitude of change for both construction and operation phase.

Up to half of LR 2b – HPR Workshops with peripheral greening are affected which can no longer be retained, around 30 – 40 nos. of trees would be affected due to direct conflict with HPR site. It is considered to experience intermediate magnitude of change for both construction and operation phase.

Almost the whole LR 2c – HPR Workshop with Scattered Greening, is overlapped with SHR Site and SHR Site Extension and therefore up to 240 – 300 nos. of trees would be affected. The large tree located in LR 2c, Ficus Microcarpa (CEDD-T62) with DBH ≥1 m, currently falls within the direct footprint of SHR Site works area. The CEDD-T62 is in conflict with the building block layout of SHR Site, retained in-situ is considered not feasible. Due to the large tree size and low amenity value, transplantation is not recommended. CEDD-T62 is suggested to be felled. (See APPENDIX 10B and 10.8.11 for further details). In the light of the above, LR 2c is considered to experience large magnitude of change for both construction and operation phase.

LR 2d - San Hing Tsuen Open Storage which is only affected in a very limited portion on the periphery, which no trees would be affected. There will be level changes due to site formation works in limited area. It is considered to experience small magnitude of change for both construction and operation phase.

The existing topography would be elevated due to site formation works. No trees would be affected for LR 2d, 2e and 2f. While there would be around 190 – 230 and 30 – 40 nos. of trees affected in LR 2a and 2b respectively due to conflict with proposed development site.

10.7.4 LR 3 - Agricultural Land/Orchard: The key adverse impacts on LR 3 are due to removal of trees, which located within SHR Site here and are partly affected by the footprint of the buildings according to the current layout. On the other hand, the topography of agricultural land in HPR Site would turn flat due to the site formation which slightly disconnects with the hillside.

It is estimated that 130 – 150 nos. of trees would be affected in LR 3a – Actively Cultivated Land, including two (2) large trees identified within this LR which are one (1) Litchi chinensis (CEDD-T23) and one (1) Ficus microcarpa (T503) with DBH ≥1 m, currently falls within the direct footprint of SHR Site and proposed Road L7 respectively. CEDD-T23 generally has a low survival rate for transplanting, especially at such mature size for its well-developed root systems and attachment to existing tree pit. Therefore, transplantation of CEDD-T23 is not recommended. In the light of potential conflict with the building block layout of SHR Site, CEDD-T23 is suggested to be felled (See APPENDIX 10B for further details). T503 currently falls within the footprint of proposed Road L7 alignment (in the south-west corner) and difference of the proposed site formation level, it is proposed to be felled as transplantation is not recommended due to the large size. The identified Aquilaria sinensis in this LR remain unaffected by the Project.

LR 3a is incompatible with the Project, with certain areas are affected, and there will be loss of greenery and permanent change from rural to a more densely built environment. Considering the quantity of trees affected and size of LR will be lost, LR 3a is considered to experience a large magnitude of change at the construction and operation phase.

On the other hand, approximately 160 – 170 nos. of trees are affected in LR 3b – Abandoned Land. Though LR 3b has fair compatibility with the project, and it has lower value of landscape elements compared to LR 3a, however, with consideration of high portion of LR 3b is affected, it is therefore to be considered to experience large magnitude of change at construction and operation phases.

10.7.5 LR 4 - Hillside Woodland: The key adverse impacts on LR 4 will be due to removal of trees (around 90 – 120 nos. of trees) caused by the construction of proposed Road L7, which all are located in LR 4a – Mixed Woodland.

1 no. of large tree identified within LR 4a – Melaleuca cajuputi subsp. Cumingiana (T589) with DBH ≥1 m, currently falls within the footprint of proposed Road L7 alignment (in the south-west corner) and difference of the proposed site formation level. T589 is proposed to be felled which transplantation is not recommended due to the large size. Another tree of large size (#9) in this LR remain unaffected by the Project. For identified Aquilaria sinensis in LR 4a, total 3 nos. (DBH are 80, 120 and 200mm) located within direct footprint of proposed Road L7 would be affected, in which one of them is topped (dying tree) with only base trunk is left while the other two are seeding. Other protected / rare / precious floral species are not located within the project site boundary.

Although relatively small areas of this LR 4a are affected, it results in a loss of greenery and permanent change from a natural landscape to a built environment. The proposed formation levels of the proposed Road L7 would also be slightly lowered compare to the existing levels at the bottom part of hillside, therefore causing considerable change to existing natural landscape. In the light of the above, LR 4a is identified to experience a large magnitude of change at both construction and operation phases.

While LR 4b – Plantation Woodland and LR 4c – Mature Secondary Woodland would not be affected by the project. LR 4b & LR 4c are identified to experience negligible magnitude of change at both construction and operation phases.

10.7.6 LR 5 – Watercourse: This LR will be mainly affected by site clearance and formation at HPR Site, SHR Site and SHR Site Extension with small sections potentially affected by the road network. The LR is incompatible with the Project since streams will be diverted and permanently converted into channelized watercourses or lost during construction and operation of the Project or into engineered drainage facilities, in which a natural topography would be transformed to an artificial water channel as a measure to retain the existing water flow.

Around 30m of natural streams LR 5.2a is overlapped with proposed road L7. The affected stream will be collected by the underground culvert along the proposed Road L7. With consideration that this LR has no notable waterflow, it is identified to experience an intermediate magnitude of change at construction and operation phases.

Natural stream LR 5.2b is also affected by Road L7, around 30m. Underground culverts would also be constructed along proposed Road L7 to collect the waterflow, if any. With consideration that this LR has no notable waterflow like LR 5.2a, it is identified to experience an intermediate magnitude of change at construction and operation phases.

Natural stream LR 5.3a is overlapped with proposed Road L7, which only up to 20m. Though very short section of this LR is affected, due to it is medium sensitivity, as well as engineering consideration of applying underground culverts along proposed Road L7, it is identified to experience an intermediate magnitude of change at construction and operation phases.

Natural stream LR 5.3b above 5.3a is also overlapped with proposed Road L7. The affected stream will be collected by the underground culvert along the proposed Road L7. Though a very short section of this stream is affected which is around 26m, about 10% of total length. Due to its high level of naturalness, it is identified to experience an intermediate magnitude of change at construction and operation phases.

Two semi-natural streams, LRs 5.1i and 5.1f are located within the proposed HPR Site. LR 5.1i is a very short section of semi-natural stream which is about 92m length and 2m width, then connect to LR 5.1j, which is a short section of channelized watercourse that currently used as village drainage. LR 5.1i is considered to experience a large magnitude of change at construction and operation phases due to its limited size of around 0.01ha, which a permanent loss during construction phase.

LR 5.1f is a major semi-natural stream. It is 812m in length and 6m width, with about 264m falls within the proposed HPR Site, and the remaining sections of about 550m located outside the Project Site at its up and downstream. All identified Nepenthes mirabilis in LR 5 are not affected by the project as they are located in the upstream. Due its low compatibility to the project, about one third of the streams being permanently lost or channelized to artificial structure, it is identified to experience a large magnitude of change at construction and operation phases.

On the other hand, for channelized watercourse, the aforementioned LR 5.1j would be entirely affected, around 90m (100%) during construction phase. With consideration that majority of LR 5.1j will be lost and this LR would not be restored, it is identified to experience intermediate magnitude of change during construction and the magnitude of change during operation will be large respectively.

A portion of LR 5.1h, approximately 230m (~50%) are located within SHR site, with very limited vegetation along these banks and mostly weeds and vegetation. It is identified to experience intermediate magnitude of change during construction and the affected section will be permanently lost and the magnitude of change in operation will be intermediate.

Most part of LR 5.1k, around 410m (~75%) would be affected due to direct conflict to SHR site. However, this LR is readily re-creatable, it is identified to experience intermediate magnitude of change during construction and the affected section will be permanently lost and the magnitude of change in operation will be intermediate.

LR 5.1l with about 400m (100%) is located within SHR site, with very limited vegetation along these banks and mostly weeds and vegetation. It is identified to experience intermediate magnitude of change during construction and the LR will be permanently lost and the magnitude of change will be large.

Lastly, a very small portion, about 20m (<1%) long section of LR 5.7 would be affected by the proposed infrastructure works at the operation phase. LR 5.7 is identified to experience small magnitude of change during construction but by operation the function of this LR will be restored and the magnitude of change will be negligible.

The natural/ semi-natural streams (LRs 5.1a – 5.1e, 5.1g, 5.1m, 5.2c, 5.2d, 5.4a – 5.4d & 5.8a – 5.8e) and channelized watercourses (LRs 5.5 & 5.6) outside the project site boundary are not affected in the construction and operation phases. The magnitude of change of these LRs will be negligible.

10.7.7 LR 6 - Urban Area: This LR is affected to a small degree by road works in the south east of the Assessment Area and other infrastructure works associating the SHR Site. Residential buildings will experience minor changes where transport routes connect to existing routes. There will be no significant change in topography.

Approximately 45 – 60 nos. of trees in LR 6a – Residential Blocks will be affected. Impacts due to earth works at construction are considered to cause small magnitude of change, but by operation the function of this LR will be restored and the magnitude of change will be negligible at construction and operation phases.

Around 10 – 20 nos. of trees would be affected in LR 6b – Key Transport Route. Due to very small amount of area and vegetation affected, proposed construction works are considered to cause negligible magnitude of change, and by operation the function of this LR will be restored and the magnitude of change will be negligible at construction and operation phases. For the layering of fresh water main and salt water main along the existing road, minor excavation works during construction phase may lead to small magnitude of change and the excavated area will be reinstated after construction. Therefore, it is considered to experience Negligible magnitude of change in operation phase.

Around 15 – 25 nos. of trees would be affected in LR 6c – Public Facilities. As this LR is considered compatible to proposed development, this LR is identified to experience small magnitude of change, but by operation the function of this LR will be restored and the magnitude of change will be negligible at construction and operation phases.

While no trees or area would be affected in LR 6d – Industrial Blocks by proposed development. Thus, the magnitude of change will be negligible at construction and operation phases.

10.7.8 LR 7 - Construction Site: This LR is affected by road works (Road L7). As there is very limited vegetation within this LR, only around 40 – 45 nos. of trees would be affected. This LR is able to accommodate change, the magnitude of change will be negligible at construction and operation phases.

10.7.9 LR 8 - Shrubland-Grassland Mosaic: This LR is not affected by the Project which is completely outside all project site boundary. There will be no significant change in topography. The magnitude of change of both LR 8a and LR 8b will be negligible at construction and operation phases.

Landscape Character Areas

10.7.10 LCA 1 Tuen Mun North Rural Fringe: The majority of the Site footprint falls within LCA 1. The major change will be due to the alteration of the open, rural and low-rise village landscape character with reasonably high numbers of trees, to a more urban, high rise environment. Approximately 870 – 1,030 trees will be affected in this LCA. Among nine (9) identified large trees with DBH ≥1 m: two (2) Ficus microcarpa (CEDD-T62 & T503) and one (1) Litchi chinensis (CEDD-T23) within SHR Site and SHR Site Extension would be inevitably felled. Therefore, the magnitude of change is still considered large at both construction and operation phases, especially considering the large scale of works within this LCA and poor to fair compatibility.

10.7.11 LCA 2 Tuen Mun North Urban Area: Only a small area of this LCA is affected by the Project and mainly will involve alteration or upgrade of roads meaning the change is highly compatible with the existing character. No significant changes in topography would be resulted. The small area with site formation and road works would be mutually merged to the existing urban topography. Approximately 70 - 110 trees will be affected in this LCA (none of them are trees of particular interest) and the magnitude of change is predicted to be small during construction when there will be site works going on, but expected to be negligible by operation, due to the compatibility of the Project which will integrate well with this LCA.

10.7.12 LCA 3 Castle Peak Foothill: The major source of impact for LCA 3 is due to the permanent loss of woodland to form the proposed Road L7. The proposed site formation level is slightly lowered compare to the existing ground levels of upland. Although a relatively small area of this LCA is affected (under 2.5 ha), it is not compatible with the Project and it is estimated 90 – 120 nos. of trees will be affected. Among two (2) identified large trees with DBH ≥1 m: one (1) Melaleuca cajuputi subsp. Cumingiana (T589) would be inevitably felled. On the other hand, 3 nos. of Aquilaria sinensis in located in hillside would be affected while 2 nos. are recommended to be transplanted. The Project also affects the border area of this LCA and pushes back its boundary with the rural fringe landscape around Yuen Long. Overall despite the small area, due to the numbers of trees affected, it is considered to undergo an intermediate magnitude of change at construction and operation phases.

Summary of Landscape Impact

10.7.13 During construction phase, the significant change in topography will be the main source of landscape impact to LR3, LR5 and LCA1, which certain area in the HPR Site will experience up to 19m level difference.

On the other hand, another source of landscape impact is due to the removal of trees (including 4 nos. of Trees of Large Size & 1 no. of Aquilaria sinensis) and permanent loss of certain LRs. LR 1g – Chung Shan Area, LR 2a – HPR Container Terminal, LR 2c – HPR Workshops with Scattered Greening, LR 3a – Actively Cultivated Land, LR 3b – Abandoned, Land LR 4a – Mixed Woodland and semi-natural streams LR 5.1i & 5.1f are therefore identified to experience large magnitude of change during both construction and operation phase before mitigation due to significant portion of these LRs are being affected including considerable numbers of trees which are irreversible.

On the other hand, some LRs are affected in a medium manner, with considerable portion are affected by proposed development, due to consideration of their sensitivity and value of existing landscape elements, they are identified to experience an intermediate magnitude of change during both construction and operation phase before mitigation. These LR includes LR 1b – Tsz Tin Tsuen, LR 1d – San Hing Tsuen, LR 2b – HPR Workshops (Peripheral greening) and natural streams LR 5.2a, 5.2b & 5.3. While LR 1f – Villa Pinada and LR 2d – San Hing Tsuen Open Storage are considered to experience small magnitude of change during both construction and operation phase before mitigation due to small portion of affected area.

Moreover, certain LRs are considered compatible with proposed development. Channelized watercourses LR5.1h, 5.1j, 5.1k & 5.1l are considered to experience intermediate magnitude of change during construction, and reduced to small during operation before mitigation, due to their high computability to project which are re-creatable and re-diverting. While there is minor impact on LR 5.7 - Tuen Mun River Channel, LR 6a – Residential Blocks and LR 6c – Public Facilities, due to the very small portion of affected area, as well as consideration of their high compatibility to the project, they are considered to experience small magnitude of change during construction, and reduced to negligible during operation before mitigation.

Lastly, beside the aforementioned LRs, LR 1a – Siu Hang Tsuen, LR 1c – Kai Lun Wai Village, LR 1e – Tuen Mun San Tsuen, LR 2e – Tong Hang Road Open Storage, LR 2f – Kwong Shan Tsuen Open Storage, LR 4b – Plantation Woodland, LR 4c – Mature Secondary Woodland, natural/ semi-natural streams LR 5.1a – 5.1e, 5.1g, 5.2c & 5.4a – 5.4b & 5.8a – 5.8e, channelized watercourse LR 5.5 & 5.6, LR 6b – Key Transport Route, LR 6d – Industrial Blocks, LR 7 - Construction Site, LR 8a – West Grassland Mosaic and LR 8b – South West Grassland Mosaic are considered to experience negligible magnitude impact.

For DP1, it consists of two LRs, including LR 2c and LR 3a. For the LR 2c within DP1, about 70% of DP1 is located in LR 2c, which includes the western part and main body of the sewage pumping station. The western part of DP1 will be mainly landscape area for compensatory trees, please refer to Annex C for details and rendering images. In overall, less than 2% of LR 2c is affected by the development of DP1, therefore, it is considered to experience small magnitude of change. While the western part DP 1 would dedicate vegetation and greenery to the existing site. For LR 3a within DP1, up to 30% of DP1 is located in LR 3a. The eastern part of DP1 consists of landscape area for compensatory trees, please refer to Annex C for details and rendering images. Vegetation of DP 1 would enhance the amenity value to vicinity of site. In overall, less than 1% of LR 3a is affected by the development of DP1, therefore, the LR 3a is considered to experience a small magnitude of change.

Significance of Landscape Impacts before Mitigation

10.7.14 The significance of the landscape impacts is a product of the magnitude of change caused by the Project and the sensitivity of the LCA/LR. The overall significance of landscape impacts within the assessment area and for DP1 before mitigation are summarised in Table 10.15 and Table 10.16, respectively.

Table 10.13 Magnitude of Change for LRs and LCAs during Construction and Operation Phases within Assessment Area

LR/ LCA Code	Name		Scale of Development	No. of Trees Affected (Affected Species of Particular Interest)	Compatibility of Project with LR/ LCA (Good/ Fair/ Poor)	Duration of Impact at (Temporary, Permanent)		Reversibility of Change (Reversible/ Irreversible)		Magnitude of Change at (Large/Intermediate/ Small/ Negligible)
						C	O	C	O	C	O
LR1	Village/ Low-rise Residential Development	LR 1a – Siu Hang Tsuen	N/A	N/A	Fair	No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	Negligible	Negligible
		LR 1c – Kai Lun Wai Village	N/A	N/A		No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	No Impact
		LR 1e – Tuen Mun San Tsuen	N/A	N/A		No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	No Impact
		LR 1f – Villa Pinada	3 – 5%	N/A		Temporary	Permanent	Reversible	Irreversible	Small	Small
		LR 1b – Tsz Tin Tsuen	16%	40 - 50		Temporary	Permanent	Reversible	Irreversible	Intermediate	Intermediate
		LR 1d – San Hing Tsuen	2 – 3%	20 - 25
		LR 1g – Chung Shan Area	40%	~		Temporary	Permanent	Reversible	Irreversible	Large	Large
LR2	Open Storage/ Workshop	LR 2e – Tong Hang Road Open Storage	N/A	N/A	Good	No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	Negligible	Negligible
		LR 2f – Kwong Shan Tsuen Open Storage	N/A	N/A
		LR 2d – San Hing Tsuen Open Storage	N/A	N/A		Temporary	Permanent	Reversible	Irreversible	Small	Small
		LR 2b – HPR Workshops (Peripheral greening)	45 - 50%	30 – 40		Temporary	Permanent	Reversible	Irreversible	Intermediate	Intermediate
		LR 2a – HPR Container Terminal	85 - 90%	190 - 230		Temporary	Permanent	Reversible	Irreversible	Large	Large
		LR 2c – HPR Workshops with Scattered Greening	90 - 95%	240 – 300 (CEDD-T62)		Temporary	Permanent	Reversible	Irreversible
LR3	Agricultural Land/ Orchard	LR 3a – Actively Cultivated Land	15 – 17%	130 – 150 (CEDD-T23 & T503)	Poor	Permanent	Permanent	Irreversible	Irreversible	Large	Large
		LR 3b – Abandoned Land	95 - 100%	160 - 170	Fair	Permanent	Permanent	Irreversible	Irreversible
LR4	Hillside Woodland	LR 4a – Mixed Woodland	4 – 5%	90 – 120 (T589 & 3 nos. of Aquilaria sinensis)	Poor	Permanent	Permanent	Irreversible	Irreversible	Large	Large
		LR 4b – Plantation Woodland	N/A	N/A		No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	Negligible	Negligible
		LR 4c – Mature Secondary Woodland	N/A	N/A		No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	Negligible	Negligible
LR5	Natural/Semi-Natural Stream	LR 5.1a – 5.1e, 5.1g, 5.1m, 5.2c, 5.2d, 5.4a – 5.4d & 5.8a – 5.8e	N/A	-	Poor	No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	Negligible	Negligible
		LR 5.2a, 5.2b, 5.3a & 5.3b	106m (10%) of total length			Permanent	Permanent	Irreversible	Irreversible	Intermediate	Intermediate
		LR 5.1i & 5.1f	356m (40%) of total length			Permanent	Permanent	Irreversible	Irreversible	Large	Large
	Channelized Watercourse	LR 5.5 & 5.6	N/A	-	Good	No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	No Impact	Negligible	Negligible
		LR 5.7	1,160m (31%) of total length			Temporary	Temporary	Reversible	Reversible	Small	Negligible
		LR5.1h & 5.1k				Temporary	Permanent	Reversible	Irreversible	Intermediate	Intermediate
		LR 5.1j & LR 5.1l				Temporary	Permanent	Reversible	Irreversible	Intermediate	Large
LR6	Urban Area	LR 6a – Residential Blocks	6 – 7%	45 - 60	Good	Temporary	Permanent	Reversible	Irreversible	Small	Negligible
		LR 6b – Key Transport Route	N/A	10 – 20						Negligible	Negligible
		LR 6c – Public Facilities	2 – 3%	15 – 25						Small	Negligible
		LR 6d – Industrial Blocks	N/A	N/A						Negligible	Negligible
LR7	Construction Site		13 - 15%	40 - 45	Good	Not applicable		Not applicable		Negligible	Negligible
LR8	Shrubland-Grassland Mosaic	LR 8a – West Grassland Mosaic	N/A	N/A	Poor	No Impact		No Impact		Negligible	Negligible
		LR 8b – South West Grassland Mosaic	N/A	N/A		No Impact		No Impact		Negligible	Negligible
LCA1	Tuen Mun North Rural Fringe		23 – 25%	870 – 1030 (CEDD-T23, CEDD-T62 & T503)	Poor to Fair	Temporary	Permanent	Reversible	Irreversible	Large	Large
LCA2	Tuen Mun North Urban Area		5 – 6%	70 - 110	Good	Temporary	Permanent	Reversible	Irreversible	Small	Negligible
LCA3	Castle Peak Foothill		2%	90 – 120 (T589 & 3 nos. of Aquilaria sinensis)	Poor	Temporary	Permanent	Reversible	Irreversible	Intermediate	Intermediate

Table 10.14 Magnitude of Change for LRs due to DP 1

LR/ LCA Code	Name		Scale of Development	No. of Trees Affected (Affected Species of Particular Interest)	Compatibility of Project with LR/ LCA (Good/ Fair/ Poor)	Duration of Impact at (Temporary, Permanent)		Reversibility of Change (Reversible/ Irreversible)		Magnitude of Change at (Large/Intermediate/ Small/ Negligible)
						C	O	C	O	C	O
LR2	Open Storage/ Workshop	LR 2c – HPR Workshops with Scattered Greening	~1.75%	4-5	Fair	Permanent	Permanent	Irreversible	Irreversible	Small	Small
LR3	Agricultural Land/ Orchard	LR 3a – Actively Cultivated Land	~0.25%	2-3	Poor	Permanent	Permanent	Irreversible	Irreversible	Small	Small

Table 10.15 Significance of Landscape Impacts before Mitigation within Assessment Area

LR/LCA Code	Name		LR/LCA Sensitivity (High/ Med/ Low)	Magnitude of Change (Large/Intermediate/ Small/ Negligible)		Impact Significance BEFORE Mitigation (Substantial/ Moderate/ Slight/ Insignificant)
				Construction	Operation	Construction	Operation
LR1	Village/ Low-rise Residential Development	LR 1a – Siu Hang Tsuen	Medium	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 1c – Kai Lun Wai Village	Medium	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 1d – San Hing Tsuen	Medium	Intermediate	Intermediate	Moderate	Moderate
		LR 1e – Tuen Mun San Tsuen	Medium	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 1f – Villa Pinada	Medium	Small	Small	Slight	Slight
		LR 1b – Tsz Tin Tsuen	High	Intermediate	Intermediate	Moderate	Moderate
		LR 1g – Chung Shan Area	High	Large	Large	Substantial	Substantial
LR2	Open Storage/ Workshop	LR 2b – HPR Workshops (Peripheral greening)	Low	Intermediate	Intermediate	Moderate	Moderate
		LR 2d – San Hing Tsuen Open Storage	Low	Small	Small	Slight	Slight
		LR 2e – Tong Hang Road Open Storage	Low	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 2f – Kwong Shan Tsuen Open Storage	Low	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 2a – HPR Container Terminal	Medium	Large	Large	Substantial	Substantial
		LR 2c – HPR Workshops with Scattered Greening	Medium	Large	Large	Substantial	Substantial
LR3	Agricultural Land/ Orchard	LR 3a – Actively Cultivated Land	High	Large	Large	Substantial	Substantial
		LR 3b – Abandoned Land	Medium	Large	Large	Substantial	Substantial
LR4	Hillside Woodland	LR 4a – Mixed Woodland	High	Large	Large	Substantial	Substantial
		LR 4b – Plantation Woodland	Medium	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 4c – Mature Secondary Woodland	High	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
LR5	Natural/Semi-Natural Stream	LR 5.1a – 5.1e, 5.1g, 5.1m, 5.2d, 5.4a, 5.8a – 5.8e	High	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 5.2a, 5.2b, 5.3a & 5.3b	Medium	Intermediate	Intermediate	Moderate	Moderate
		5.1g, 5.2c & 5.4b – 5.4d	Medium	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 5.1i & 5.1f	Medium	Large	Large	Substantial	Substantial
	Channelized Watercourse	LR 5.5 & 5.6	Low	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 5.7	Low	Small	Negligible	Slight	Insignificant
		LR 5.1j & 5.1l	Low	Intermediate	Large	Moderate	Moderate
		LR5.1h & 5.1k	Low	Intermediate	Intermediate	Moderate	Moderate
LR6	Urban Area	LR 6a – Residential Block	Medium	Small	Negligible	Slight	Insignificant
		LR 6b – Key Transport Route	Low	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 6c – Public Facilities	Medium	Small	Negligible	Slight	Insignificant
		LR 6d – Industrial Blocks	Low	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
LR7	Construction Site		Low	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
LR8	Shrubland-Grassland Mosaic	LR 8a – West Grassland Mosaic	Medium	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 8b – South West Grassland Mosaic	Medium	Negligible	Negligible	Insignificant	Insignificant
LCA1	Tuen Mun North Rural Fringe		Medium	Large	Large	Substantial	Substantial
LCA2	Tuen Mun North Urban Area		Medium	Small	Negligible	Slight	Insignificant
LCA3	Castle Peak Foothill		High	Intermediate	Intermediate	Moderate	Moderate

Table 10.16 Significance of Landscape Impacts before Mitigation for DP1

LR/LCA Code	Name		LR Sensitivity (High/ Med/ Low)	Magnitude of Change (Large/Intermediate/ Small/ Negligible)		Impact Significance BEFORE Mitigation (Substantial/ Moderate/ Slight/ Insignificant)
				Construction	Operation	Construction	Operation
LR2	Open Storage/ Workshop	LR 2c – HPR Workshops with Scattered Greening	Low	Small	Small	Slight	Slight
LR3	Agricultural Land/ Orchard	LR 3a – Actively Cultivated Land	Low	Small	Small	Slight	Slight

Visual

10.7.15 This section appraises the significance threshold due to the potential impacts identified in Section 10.6, considering magnitude of change to baseline conditions due to the DP and sensitivity of receivers. VSRs have been selected to reflect the effect of the proposed Project on key public viewers, with significance threshold referencing the photomontages for each VSR presented in Figure 10.10 to Figure 10.23.

Construction Phase

10.7.16 Major visual impacts are primarily due to the construction of structures including proposed high-rise buildings, road system, sewage pumping station, footbridge, noise barrier, water services reservoirs and natural terrain.

10.7.17 On the other hand, minor visual impact will also involve the impacts raised from excavation works, site formation works of man-made slopes and retaining structures & works areas, as well as traffic diversions, obstruction of views due to hoarding and loss of greenery due to the removal of vegetation. However, as the surrounding housing blocks are much taller compared to the aforementioned works, these minor impacts would be concealed or is hardly visible for distant viewers.

10.7.18 All of the VSRs are affected due to different extent of degradation of existing visual resources, ranging from large to insignificant. Due to the complexity of assessment area, most of the VSRs would experience subtle to medium changes, as the existing visual components (eg. high to low-rise blocks, existing vegetation) would act as a visual barrier that limit the vision towards the project. While locations adjacent to periphery of the Project would experience more obvious changes.

10.7.19 Visual blockage would be gradually built-up phase by phase as a continuous process from construction to operation phase. Impact created by construction works at lower level are limited due to composition of existing views as mentioned in 10.7.18, which views are partially screened by adjacent architectures, existing vegetation and level difference of landforms. And therefore, the nature of visual impact of both phases are mainly due to blockage of views by high-rise blocks. With consideration of viewing distance, the potential impacts during the construction stage will be broadly similar to operation phase which range from substantially to slightly adverse. Please refer to Table 10.17.

10.7.20 The recommended mitigation measures and residual impact on these VSRs is further discussed in Sections 10.8 and 10.9.

Operation Phase

10.7.21 The impacts during operation are primarily due to high rise building blocks in the HPR Site, SHR Site and SHR Site Extension which would obstruct some current open views. The proposed road system will be at-grade and therefore not impact those further away whose views of it would be blocked by other buildings and vegetation. With regards to the proposed SPS, this is designed to be under 15 m tall and is expected to be a relatively minor source of visual impact amongst the new high-rise structures.

10.7.22 The proposed development has a mix of compatibility with the existing area, since there is some existing high-rise character but the new high-rise elements will obstruct a number of views to ridgelines. This is reflective of the Project Site being on the periphery of an urban area that is bordered by hill ranges and ridgelines (also see Figure 10.4).

10.7.23 The magnitude of change and the significance of impacts on VSRs in the construction and operation phases before mitigation are described below and summarised in Table 10.17.

VSR1 from Car Park, Tuen Tsz Wai

10.7.24 VSR1 is affected by SHR Site and SHR Site Extension as well as HPR Site. The proposed high-rise residential blocks are largely incompatible with the existing surroundings which will dominate views. Views to ridgelines in the background will be mostly blocked causing substantial loss of visual openness. The magnitude of change will be large with degradation of existing visual resources. Overall, the significance threshold is substantially adverse before mitigation.

VSR2 from Public Open Area between Tuen Mun San Tsuen and Botania Villa

10.7.25 VSR2 is mainly affected by SHR site. The existing view has mixed composition with some higher rise residential blocks on the periphery with which the proposed Project is largely compatible, as well as a dominance of low-rise village structures, which the proposed Project is incompatible with. The Project will cause minimal visual obstruction and magnitude of change is small with minimal visual degradation of existing visual resources. Overall, the significance threshold is slightly adverse before mitigation.

VSR3 from Pui Lin Garden, Siu Hang Tsuen

10.7.26 VSR3 is partly affected by SHR Site, SHR Site Extension as they are hardly visible above the existing structures. The proposed high-rise residential blocks are largely incompatible with the existing surroundings where they are visible but cause minimal visual obstruction. Visual openness remains largely intact and the magnitude of change on public viewers will be small with minimal visual degradation of existing visual resources. Overall, the significance threshold is slightly adverse before mitigation.

VSR4 from Tsing Lun Road Footbridge

10.7.27 VSR4 is affected by SHR Site mainly. Since there is already a large high-rise component to the existing views, they are relatively enclosed and the proposed Project will only slightly increase the obstruction of views. The magnitude of change is considered as intermediate with medium effect on visual resources. Overall, the significance threshold is moderately adverse before mitigation.

VSR5 from Kei Lun Wai Children’s Playground

10.7.28 VSR5 is affected by SHR Site. The existing view includes a number of high-rise residential blocks, both new and older, mixed with low-rise village area and partial open views towards the north. Views to Yuen Tau Shan ridgeline that are currently not visible which is blocked by the low-rise building in the front. As the overall visual composition will be largely similar, the magnitude of change is considered small with minimal effect on visual resources. Overall, the significance threshold is slightly adverse before mitigation.

VSR6 from Po Tong Ha

10.7.29 VSR6 currently has good views of the hillside ridgelines as a backdrop and these will be largely blocked by the Project causing loss of visual openness. Public viewers here will experience substantial change and while electricity pylon in the current view will become less prominent, overall, there is large degradation of the existing visual resources. Overall, the significance threshold is substantially adverse before mitigation.

VSR7 from Raised Public Road Outside Siu Hong MTR Station

10.7.30 VSR7 currently has mixed views, with high rise residential blocks of Siu Hing Court on the left but more open views to Yuen Tau Shan ridgeline to the right. There are notably prominent electricity pylons on the right of the view also and although these will become less dominant with the proposed Project’s new residential blocks behind them, these blocks will obstruct views to the mountains/ hillsides behind causing a loss of visual openness. Overall public viewers will experience a intermediate change in view and including degradation of the visual resources.

Given the low sensitivity of this VSR, due to transient nature of viewers who are mostly traveling on MTR in a moving status, the significance threshold is identified as moderately adverse before mitigation.

VSR8 from Tsing Chung Koon Road

10.7.31 VSR8 representing viewers near Ching Chung Koon, along the main public Tsing Chung Koon Road and the proposed Project, whose high-rise elements are over 1,000 m away, are hardly visible. The Project causes no visual obstruction and minimal degradation of visual resources and the magnitude of change is small. Overall, the significance threshold is considered slightly adverse before mitigation.

VSR9 from Miu Fat Monastery Public Viewing Platform

10.7.32 VSR9 is affected by the proposed high-rise developments at SHR Site & School site, SHR Site Extension and HPR Site. SHR extension and HPR site would significantly change the overall visual composition, adding high-rise elements over the existing rural setting at the middle of this visually sensitive receiver and causing intermediate change in view to public viewers. While there is already high-rise components to the left of this view, major part of SHR site would overlap with the existing high-rise buildings complex. Overall, only around 15 – 20% of ridgeline would be covered by the proposed development.

Considering the frequency of the use of this public viewing platform and given the medium sensitivity of viewers from this location, the significance threshold is considered moderately adverse before mitigation.

VSR10 from Tuen Mun Path, Route 1

10.7.33 VSR10 is far from the proposed Project and the high-rise developments at SHR Site, SHR Site Extension and HPR Site will all be visible. However, there is already a high-rise component dominating the foreground views in this area and the proposed development is compatible with this, and no ridgeline views are obstructed. Overall, the magnitude of change is small with minimal visual degradation and the significance threshold are considered slightly adverse before mitigation.

VSR11 from Trail between Castle Peak and Por Lo Shan

10.7.34 VSR11 is far from the proposed Project and the high-rise developments at SHR Site, SHR Site Extension and HPR Site will all be visible. There is a prominent high-rise component dominating the low-lying valley areas of this view and the proposed development extends this towards the green hillsides but is generally compatible, and only small proportion of hillside view is obstructed. Overall, the magnitude of change is considered intermediate with medium visual degradation and the significance threshold are considered moderately adverse before mitigation.

VSR12 from Chung Shan Hillside with Graves

10.7.35 VSR12 representing viewers coming to grave sites as well as those around Chung Shan area and current views are low rise village development in the foreground with distant views of pylons and high-rise elements at the centre of this VSR. And the only visible ridgeline is at the left side.

The proposed Project will largely change the composition of the view, with the high-rise residential blocks and a proposed school being right next to this VSR. Views to mountain/ hillside ridgelines will be partially blocked. Visual openness would be lost and around 50% of mountain view would be visible. The magnitude of change will be large with substantial degradation of the existing visual resources. Considering infrequent public visits at this area (mainly during Ching Ming or Chung Yeung festival, around 2 – 3 times a year) for tomb-sweeping, and in short duration. Overall, given the medium sensitivity and the above justification, the significance threshold is still identified as moderately adverse before mitigation.

VSR13 from West Railway heading South-west

10.7.36 VSR13 represents viewers travelling on the MTR with low sensitivity. Although there are good panoramic views whose visual composition will be largely changed by the proposed Project, and some views to mountains/ hillside ridgelines partly blocked, viewer are travelling and the effect will be intermediate but transient. Overall, the significance threshold is moderately adverse here before mitigation.

VSR14 from Hong Po Road Roundabout

10.7.37 VSR14 represents drivers or pedestrian passing the roundabout area. The broad view with mountain ridgeline and sky would be partially blocked by proposed buildings of SHR site, DP 1 Sewage Pumping Station and PTI at the central and northern side. As viewers in this area would stay in a short duration, and the effect will be intermediate but transient. Overall, the significance threshold is moderately adverse here before mitigation.

Summary for Impact Significance before Mitigation

10.7.38 In summary, 2 nos. of VSRs (1 & 6) are identified as substantially adverse due to large degradation of existing visual resources. 7 nos. of VSRs (4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13 & 14) are identified as moderately adverse due to partial blockage of existing view while 5 nos. of VSRs (2, 3, 5, 8 & 10) are identified as slightly adverse with small/ minimal visual degradation.

Table 10.17 Significance of Visual Impacts on Visually Sensitive Receivers in the Construction and Operation Phases before Mitigation

VSR	Description	Sensitivity (Low, Medium, High)	Approx. Viewing Distance to High Rise Elements (m)	Source of Impact	Scale of the Development relative to Baseline Conditions (Nil / Small / Medium / Large)	Description of Impact	Blockage of View (Nil / Small / Medium / Large)	Compatibility of the Project with Surrounding Landscape (Nil / Low / Medium / High)	Reversibility of Change (Yes / No / Not Applicable)	Duration of Impacts (Nil / Short / Medium / Long)	Magnitude of Change		Significance Threshold before Mitigation
											C	O	C	O
1	View from Car Park, Tuen Tsz Wai	High	250	SHR Site, SHR Site Extension, HPR Site	Large	Proposed building mass dominate existing views and setting	Large: Views to mountain/hillside ridgelines visible in the background will be mostly blocked, and there is huge loss of visual openness.	Low	No	Construction Stage: Long (9 years) Operation Stage: Long	Large	Large	Substantially adverse	Substantially adverse
2	View from Public Open Area between Tuen Mun San Tsuen and Botania Villa	Low	400	SHR Site	Small	Proposed building mass is only partly visible in existing view includes a number of high-rise residential blocks, mixed with low rise village area	Small: Minimal visual obstruction and visual openness remains largely intact.	Medium	No	Construction Stage: Medium (9 years) Operation Stage: Long	Small	Small	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse
3	View from Piu Lin Garden, Siu Hang Tsuen	Low	550	SHR Site, SHR Site Extension	Medium	Proposed building mass will not be very visible beyond existing structures	Small: Minimal visual obstruction and visual openness remains largely intact.	Medium	No	Construction Stage: Long (9 years) Operation Stage: Long	Small	Small	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse
4	View from Tsing Lun Road footbridge	Medium	300	SHR Site	Medium	Proposed building mass partially visible in existing view with high-rise components on two sides	Small: Minimal visual obstruction since other new developments mean the existing view is already relatively enclosed.	High	No	Construction Stage: Medium (6 years) Operation Stage: Long	Inter-mediate	Inter-mediate	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse
5	View from Kei Lun Wai Children’s Playground	Low	400	SHR Site	Small	Proposed building mass is only partly visible due to blockage of numbers of existing high-rise residential in the front	Small: Views to Yuen Tau Shan ridgeline that are currently not visible which is blocked by the low-rise building in the front. The overall visual composition will be largely similar.	High	No	Construction Stage: Medium (6 years) Operation Stage: Long	Small	Small	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse
6	View from Po Tong Ha	High	250	SHR Site, SHR Site Extension, HPR Site	Large	Proposed building mass dominate existing views and setting	Large: Views to mountain/hillside ridgelines visible in the background will be largely blocked, and there is loss of visual openness.	Low	No	Construction Stage: Long (9 years) Operation Stage: Long	Large	Large	Substantially adverse	Substantially adverse
7	View from Raised Public Road Outside Siu Hong MTR Station	Low	350	SHR Site, SHR Site Extension, HPR Site	Medium	Proposed building mass dominate right site of existing view with high-rise at the left	Medium: Views to mountain/hillside ridgelines visible in the background will be partially blocked, and there is a loss of visual openness	Medium	No	Construction Stage: Long (7 years) Operation Stage: Long	Inter-mediate	Inter-mediate	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse
8	View from Tsing Chung Koon Road	Low	1400	SHR Site Extension	Nil	Proposed building mass is hardly visible in existing view	Nil: No visual obstruction	High	No	Construction Stage: Long (7 years) Operation Stage: Long	Small	Small	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse
9	View from Miu Fat Monastery Public Viewing Platform	Medium	500	SHR Site & School Site, SHR Site Extension, HPR Site	Medium	Proposed building mass obstruct central area on existing view with high-rise elements on the left	Medium: Views to mountain/hillside ridgelines visible in the background will be partly blocked, and there is loss of visual openness	Medium	No	Construction Stage: Medium (9 years) Operation Stage: Long	Inter-mediate	Inter-mediate	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse
10	View from Tuen Mun Path, Route 1	Low	1600	SHR Site, SHR Site Extension, HPR Site	Small	Proposed building mass would slightly add-up to high-rise component of existing foreground views	Small: Visible Ridgelines remain intact and there is minimal visual obstruction	Medium	No	Construction Stage: Medium (9 years) Operation Stage: Long	Small	Small	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse
11	View from Trail between Castle Peak and Por Lo Shan	High	3000	SHR Site, SHR Site Extension, HPR Site	Medium	Proposed building mass would slightly add-up to high-rise component of existing foreground views	Small: Only small proportion of hillside view is obstructed	Medium	No	Construction Stage: Medium (9 years) Operation Stage: Long	Inter-mediate	Inter-mediate	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse
12	View from Chung Shan Hillside with Graves	Medium	10	SHR Site, SHR Site Extension & School Site	Medium	Proposed building mass partially obstruct the visual composition of existing low rise rural context	Large: Views to mountain/hillside ridgelines visible in the background will be partially blocked, and visual openness would be lost	Medium	No	Construction Stage: Medium (9 years) Operation Stage: Long	Large	Large	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse
13	View from West Railway heading south-west	Low	450	SHR Site & School Site, SHR Site Extension, HPR Site	Medium	Proposed building mass obstruct central area on existing view with high-rise elements on the left	Medium: Views to mountain/hillside ridgelines visible in the background will be partly blocked, and there is loss of visual openness	Medium	No	Construction Stage: Medium (9 years) Operation Stage: Long	Inter-mediate	Inter-mediate	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse
14^(a)	View from Hong Po Road Roundabout	Medium	200	SHR Site, DP 1, PTI	Medium	Proposed building mass obstruct central and northern area of existing view with mountain ridgeline at northern side	Medium: Views to mountain/hillside ridgelines visible in the background will be partly blocked, and there is loss of visual openness	Low	No	Construction Stage: Medium (6 years) Operation Stage: Long	Inter-mediate	Inter-mediate	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse

Note: (a) This VSR is selected to represent viewers, mainly drivers who drive from Tsing Lun Road to Hong Po Road and the PDA via roundabout for DP1.

10.8 Mitigation Measures

10.8.1 Mitigation measures follow the principle of the mitigation pyramid, which is firstly to undertake all means to avoid impacts, then reduce any unavoidable impacts to as low as practicable and finally to mitigate any remaining impacts. The Project, however, will inevitably cause some landscape impact and visual impacts. APPENDIX 10B provides further details on the trees in the area and in particular any tree of particular interest that may be affected by the Project. The measures described in Table 10.18 are suggested to mitigate unavoidable impacts from the Project. Associated funding and implementation agencies are also outlined.

10.8.2 Many of the mitigation measures serve as both landscape and visual mitigation (e.g. compensatory planting can both compensate for trees lost as well as provide visual screening for VSRs) and are relevant to both.

Design Consideration

10.8.3 During design stage, considerations have been made to avoid foreseeable impact, including optimise the design and alignment of proposed Road L7. Other design considerations have also been carried out in order to provide sufficient open space and architectural treatments to proposed development, which aims to minimise impact on landscape resources and visual as far as practical, detail consideration as below:

10.8.4 The project proponent will ensure the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines, particularly Chapter 4 (Recreation, Open Space and Greening) and Chapter 11 (Urban Design Guidelines) are adhered throughout the Project. Tentative open space area is shown in Figures 10.24a to 10.24e – Landscape Mitigation Plan.

Sufficient open space would allow incorporation of range of facilities in the future, which could accommodate leisure activities, active and/or passive recreation use for the population. Quality open space will be incorporated in proportion to the target population for each Housing Development Site. The project proponent will ensure their target open space area for the Project is provided with adequate greening. There would be a minimum of 20% green coverage within the housing sites and that landscape opportunities would be maximised where possible.

10.8.5 Detailed Design Measures: Before construction, it is necessary to refine the Project Design where possible, to minimise footprint area and ensure visual elements of each new structure are considered. Design measures include aesthetic architectural treatment and chromatic treatment, which shall be carefully selected to best respond to the existing context.

For façade treatment, it is suggested to apply naturalistic finishing materials which provide disguising effect that merge proposed building to surrounding context visually. Also, incorporation of greening features is highly recommended on feasible structural area to create visually pleasing effect, which reduces both landscape and visual impact. On the other hand, by providing colour scheme of chromatic alternation to façade materials and avoid usage of monotonous colour, could improve the visual appearance of building. Design of tree locations shall ensure that trees will not block off road light onto footpath and carriageway, and will be planted at least 5m away from lighting columns.

10.8.6 Underground pipes at proposed Road L7: For natural streams that are being affected in small section in Proposed Road L7 including LRs 5.2a, 5.2b, 5.3a and 5.3b, the affected streams will be collected by the underground culvert along the proposed Road L7, which would be consolidated by design consideration.

10.8.7 Mitigation measures are provided for construction and operation phases. Some mitigation measure can often be relevant to both construction and operation phases of the proposed development. Detailed design measures will be implemented during construction but will aim to be effective at reducing the impacts for both construction and operation phases. Equally, soft landscape mitigation measures such as compensatory planting may be implemented during construction, but their full effect will often not be appreciated for up to 10 years i.e. at operation. All measures should be implemented at the earliest stage possible i.e. at or before construction, particularly for soft landscaping.

10.8.8 All soft landscaping working (e.g. planting areas for compensatory planting, open space) should be carried out according to Detailed Landscape Design and Planting Plan which must be approved by relevant departments. Report will be submitted for the Project at a later stage and will include full details of tree treatment, including retention, transplantation, felling and compensatory tree planting. The above details will also form part of the Detailed Landscape Design and Planting Plan.

10.8.9 MM1 – Tree Protection and Preservation. This mitigation measure shall fulfil the requirements of both DEVB TC(W) No. 4/2020 and DEVB TC(W) No. 5/2020 concerning Tree Preservation. A full tree survey of all trees affected will be undertaken and submitted to the appropriate government department(s). This will include recommendations for all trees, together with a compensatory planting plan. Trees should be retained where possible. Any trees with good amenity value and are unable to be retained should be considered for their suitability for transplanting.

Seven (7) nos. of trees of large size would be retained, including #5, #6, #7, #9, #10, #11 & #12. Most of the retained trees of large size are located distant from project site, except for #9, which is located close to north edge of SHR Site Extension. #9 should be adequately protected by robust fencing at the commencement of the site formation and/or construction works, to ensure it is free from compaction, excavation, construction materials and debris throughout the construction stage.

Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) should be provided to #9, according to Para 3.3.3 of DEVB, Greening, Landscape and Tree Management Section (April 2015) - Guidelines on Tree Preservation during Development. In general circumstances, the ‘Dripline method’ shall be adopted to determine the minimum size of TPZ, which the tree canopy dripline is used to define the boundary of the TPZ and the entire area within the dripline is considered the TPZ. Should works within TPZ be considered unavoidable, arboriculture assessment should be made to assess the impacts of the proposed works to #9. The project department should minimise the anticipated impacts and avoid irreversible and/or irreparable damage to #9 as far as practical.

On the other hand, some trees in urban area are overlapped with proposed infrastructure works including installation of noise barriers, main-laying works along Ming Kum Road, Tsz Tin Road and Tsing Lun Road. TPZ would be provided to trees adjacent to infrastructure works, and with sufficient protection offered to roadside trees, approximately 100 nos. of trees could be retained within project site boundary.

Among 9,615 – 11,055 nos. of trees within 500m Assessment Area, approximately 8,350 – 9,800 nos. of trees would be retained. Trees adjacent to project site boundary would be taken careful consideration. 1m of buffer zone is provided along proposed Road L7 to ensure sufficient space offered to retained trees, and to prevent unnecessary removal of trees due to road works.

10.8.10 MM2 – Tree Transplanting. Trees unavoidably affected by the Project should be transplanted where practical. Trees should be transplanted straight to their final recipient site and not held in a temporary nursery as far as possible. A detailed Tree Transplanting Specification shall be provided in the Contract Specification, where applicable. Sufficient time for necessary tree root and crown preparation periods shall be allowed in the project programme. A detailed transplanting proposal will be submitted to relevant government departments for approval in accordance with DEVB TC(W) No. 5/2020 and DEVB TC(W) No. 4/2020 and final locations of transplanted trees should be agreed before commencement of the works.

Among 59 nos. of identified Aquilaria sinensis, 3 nos. would be affected by proposed development, and two (2 nos.) Aquilaria sinensis would be transplanted to recipient site while the third Aquilaria sinensis is a topped dying tree, therefore, transplantation would not be carried out due to its poor condition. Recipient site for Aquilaria sinensis is indicated in Figure 10.24a – Landscape Mitigation Plan. In event of the worst-case scenario only the two affected Aquilaria sinensis mentioned above are proposed to be transplanted. Please refer to APPENDIX 10B for details.

10.8.11 MM3 – Compensatory Planting and New Tree Planting. According to the broad brush tree survey, approximately 1,300 nos. of existing trees will be affected due to the project. To compensate the loss of greenery, not less than 1,300 nos. of new trees in different sizes is proposed to be planted as far as practicable. Among these trees, 800 nos. will be provided within housing sites.

Existing trees will be preserved as far as practicable; if retained trees are not practicable, transplant the affected trees to other permanent locations within the project sites or the adjacent areas will be considered. While tree preservation or transplanting is unsuitable or impracticable, tree removal arising from the project would be considered.

The compensatory planting proposals for the loss of existing trees shall be submitted to relevant government departments for approval in accordance with DEVB TC(W) No.4/2020 and final locations for compensatory tree planting shall be agreed before commencement of the works.

Shrubs and grass planting are also provided to compensate the loss of shrubs/ grasses, where are proposed within HPR Site, SHR Site, SHR Site Extension and along the proposed Road L7 and realigned Hong Po Road. Please refer to Figure 10.24a to 10.24e – Landscape Mitigation Plan. Climber is suggested on retaining structure associated with modified slope, details please refer to MM6.

10.8.12 MM4 – Roadside Greening. The allocation of space on roads for quality greening and landscape works should be in accordance with DEVB TC(W) No. 2/2012 – Allocation of Space for Quality Greening on Roads as below.

Greening would be provided in main roads of proposed development including proposed Road L7 and Hong Po Road. Roadside trees and shrubs planting are provided along local distributors, central dividers and road islands. Especially proposed road mostly falls within village area of LR 1 and woodland of LR 4, which are both rich in vegetation, this measure would help to soften the hard edges of road structure and reduce the visual bulkiness. Well-implemented roadside greening would further integrate with the architectural appearance of road structure which enhance the overall aesthetic to public. Selection of trees should interface with the Greening Master Plan of Tuen Mun District to provide an integral theme that merge with surrounding environment mutually.

Noted that this measure is grouped together in one legend with Screen Planting (MM5) in Figures 10.24a - 10.24e – Landscape Mitigation Plan. As buffer trees planting, as well as greening of roads are necessary to be incorporated to one another for better greening effect. With the implementation of MM4 and MM5, it estimated that about 500 nos. of new trees would be planted along proposed Road L7 to compensate the loss of greenery in PDA.

10.8.13 MM5 – Screen Planting. This measure includes tall screen trees and shrubs that offer buffer effects. They are proposed along road alignment and corridor, as well as road sections to improve the compatibility with surrounding context for better pedestrian experience. As proposed Road L7 is enclosing LR 1a – Siu Hang Tsuen while realigned Hong Po Road enclosed mainly LR 1b – Tsz Tin Tsuen, this measure helps to provide buffer effects that reduce the visual bulkiness of road structure to nearby village area. Please refer to Figures 10.24a – 10.24b – Landscape Mitigation Plan.

10.8.14 MM6 – Landscape Treatment on Man Made Slope/ Retaining Structure is proposed in the eastern edge, slope near service reservoirs of HPR site, and also along proposed Road L7. Hydroseeding shall be provided on modified slopes when grading works are completed. Woodland tree seedling will be incorporated where site conditions allow with suitable slope gradient.

For the taller retaining structure (8 – 15.3m) of proposed Road L7, climbers are proposed to retaining structure associated with modified slope which aim to provide greenery to vertical surfaces and help to reduce the visual bulkiness to viewers. Minimum 300mm soil depth and width would be proposed to the planters along the cycling track. For the shorter retaining structure (3.35 – 11.1m), shrub planting with minimum 600m soil depth and width would be provided to soften the hard edge. Details please refer to Figure 10.27.

All landscape works on slope should comply with GEO No. 1/2011 – Technical Guidelines on Landscape Treatment and Bio-Engineering for Man-made Slopes and Retaining Walls.

10.8.15 MM7 – Noise Barrier Treatment. In the context of the scale and type of the development the noise barriers will contribute to the overall impacts, rather than be a sole source of impact. There will be 2 types of proposed noise barriers, which are vertical noise barrier and noise barrier with cantilever. Please refer to Figures 10.24a, 10.24b & 10.24c for their dimension and location.

In order to reduce visual impact, design of noise barrier is required to incorporate surface treatments promoting visual amenity, combination of sound absorbent materials with suitable colour selection of structures and panels, and incorporation of climbers to the barriers. Figure 10.27 showed the typical section and detailed description for greening of noise barrier. With the above consideration well-implemented, combination of appropriate colour scheme and material selection would help to maintain the visual attractiveness to road users and nearby-residents.

On the other hand, opening at the noise barrier for crossing is offered, and a fully enclosed pedestrian walkway will be provided behind the crossing to shield E24's line of sight to barrier opening at the south side of proposed Road L7. Please refer to Figures 10.24c for detail location.

Design of noise barriers is required to fulfil DEVB Greening, Landscape and Tree Management Section (April 2012) – Greening of Noise Barriers and HyD PN No. BSTR/PN/003-Revision C – Noise Barriers with Transparent Panels and be submitted to the Advisory Committee on the Appearance of Bridges and Associated Structures (ACABAS) for consultation.

10.8.16 MM8 – Minimise Light Pollution and Glare. There is the potential for light pollution and glare during the construction period if night-time working is required. To mitigate this, night-time lighting should be minimised and directional, and cowl lights shall be used. This measure is relevant to operation also and will occur due to the new buildings reflecting light and due to the night-time highway lighting increasing the ambient light levels. The former should be countered by the use of non-reflective materials on the building facades. The latter will be alleviated by the use of directional and cowl highway lighting, following the standards in HyD’s Public Lighting Design Manual (September 2006 version).

10.8.17 MM9 – Hoarding of Construction Works. The significance threshold on elevated VSRs in high-rise buildings, from the construction works are not able to be screened. However, at ground level the works can be screened by the use of a hoarding between the works and the lower level VSRs. The design/provision of the hoarding should follow the requirements set out in PNAP No.75 - APP-23 Hoardings, Covered Walkways and Gantries (including Temporary Access for Construction Traffic) Building (Planning) Regulations Part IX.

10.8.18 MM10 – Enhancement of Semi-natural Stream (6m buffer zone). Following the ecological impact assessment, the direct avoidance of 208m semi-natural stream LR 5.1f at HPR site is proposed in order to protect species with conservation interest in this section of streams.

Enhancement is recommended for the retained onsite section which includes reinstatement of the disturbed stream bank by demolition of adjacent artificial structures and set 6m buffer zone for plantation of native plant species. Native/self-sustaining vegetation will be introduced along the reinstated bank of stream within the 6m buffer zone. Please refer to Section 10.9.1 and Figure 10.28 for further details.

Please refer to Figure 10.24a – 10.24e – Landscape Mitigation Plan for the location of retained streams.

10.8.19 MM11 – Landscape Work and Green Roof for Infrastructure. Green roof and corresponding landscape work such as planting of climbers, shrubs and bamboo would be carried out for SPS (DP1), service reservoirs and proposed PTIs area in order to enhance the greenery of proposed structure. A minimum 20% greenery is proposed for the areas within the SPS boundary. Vertical planting is also proposed for the boundary fence of the SPS at SHR Site. Please refer to Figure 10.24a – 10.24e – Landscape Mitigation Plan for their location and APPENDIX 10C for further details of SPS. Where space and appropriate planting conditions allow (i.e. where suitable depth of planting medium is possible, maintenance access available), shrubs should be considered to be planted on footbridge near Ng Lau Road for amenity purposes. Please refer to Figure 10.24b for detail location.

10.8.20 MM12 – Woodland Enhancement Planting with Ecological Enhancement. Due to the permanent loss of 1.2 ha of mixed woodland of LR4 mostly for the construction of proposed Road L7, enhancement planting of not less than 1.2 ha is proposed. An off-site location where located northeast side of the HPR Site is recommended. Please refer to Figure 10.24a for the location of the enhancement planting area.

The agencies responsible for funding, implementation, management and maintenance of landscape mitigation measures, that may start during construction but carry on to operation is given in Table 10.18 and Figure 10.24a – 10.24e are the Landscape Mitigation Plan showing mitigation measures. The management and maintenance agencies during construction and operation stages are identified as per DEVB TC(W) No. 6/2015. Agreement from individual agent shall be sought before commencement of construction works. All landscape works within public housing developments and school sites will be the responsibility of Housing Department (HD) and Education Bureau (EDB), respectively. For the layering of fresh water main and salt water main along the existing road, minor excavation works during construction phase and the excavated areas will be reinstated after construction. Therefore, no landscape impact is expected in operation phase and no mitigation measures is required.

Table 10.18 Landscape and Visual Mitigation Measures

ID No.	Mitigation Measure	C	O	Funding Agency	Implementation Agency	Management/ Maintenance Agency
MM1	Tree Protection and Preservation	✓	✓	CEDD	CEDD (via Contractor)	LCSD / HyD / AFCD / HAD / LandsD / Allocatee department (Dependent on location) ^(3)
MM2	Tree Transplanting	✓	✓	CEDD	CEDD (via Contractor)	LCSD / HyD / AFCD / HAD / LandsD / Allocatee department (Dependent on location of new planting.) ^(3)
MM3	Compensatory Planting and New Tree Planting	✓	✓	CEDD/ HD	CEDD/ HD (via Contractor)	LCSD / HyD / AFCD / HAD / LandsD / HD / ArchSD (Dependent on location of new planting.)^(3)
MM4 ^(1) (2)	Roadside Greening		✓	CEDD	CEDD (via Contractor)	LCSD (Roadside Amenity)/ HyD (Expressway) ^(3)
MM5	Screen Planting	✓	✓	CEDD	CEDD (via Contractor)	LCSD / HyD / HAD / LandsD / Allocatee department (Dependent on location) ^(3)
MM6	Landscape Treatment on Man Made Slope/ Retaining Structure	✓	✓	CEDD	CEDD (via Contractor)	LCSD / HyD / HAD / LandsD / Allocatee department (Dependent on location) ^(3)
MM7	Noise Barrier Treatment		✓	CEDD	CEDD (via Contractor)	LCSD (along non-expressway public roads outside country parks) / HyD (within the boundary of expressways)
MM8	Minimize Light Pollution and Glare	✓	✓	CEDD/HD	CEDD/HD (via Contractor)	HD
MM9	Hoarding of Construction Works	✓		CEDD/HD	CEDD/HD (via Contractor)	CEDD/HD (via Contractor)^(4)
MM10	Enhancement of Semi-natural Stream (6 m buffer zone)	✓	✓	CEDD/HD	CEDD/HD (via Contractor)	LandsD / Allocatee department ^(3)
MM11	Landscape Work & Green Roof for Infrastructure		✓	CEDD/ HD	CEDD/ HD (via Contractor)	HD / HyD / WSD/ DSD (Dependent on location) ^(3)
MM12	Woodland Enhancement Planting with Ecological Enhancement		✓	CEDD/ HD	CEDD/ HD (via Contractor)	AFCD ^(5)
(1) The Contractor will be responsible for landscaping during the agreed establishment and maintenance period. Other designated management agents to take up management of landscaping after end of agreed period. (2) The Contractor will provide LCSD and HyD with water points, irrigation system where feasible, as well as proper access and safe working conditions for maintenance of the vegetation. LCSD is responsible for the maintenance of the vegetation as well as facilities required for the vegetation maintenance, e.g. the water points and irrigation system, unless another department has agreed to take up the maintenance responsibility of these facilities. (3) Refer to Para 13. Demarcation of Maintenance Responsibility for Vegetation of DEVB TCW No. 6/2015 for clear allocation of maintenance responsibilities on both vegetation and hard landscape features. LCSD is responsible for the maintenance of vegetation along non-expressway public roads (outside country parks). HyD is responsible for the vegetation within the boundary of expressways. AFCD is responsible for the maintenance of vegetation within country parks, but outside the boundary of expressways. HAD is responsible for the vegetation along footpaths in village environs and access roads maintained. LandsD is responsible for the maintenance of vegetation for the unleased/unallocated government land not maintained by other departments. Allocatee department is responsible for the maintenance of vegetation within the allocated government land. (4) Hoarding is only provided during the construction phase and will be removed before the operation phase. No maintenance is required during operation phase. (5) According to DEVB TCW No. 6/2015, AFCD will maintain the ecological planting as recommended by EIA till the vegetation is fully established (which normally takes about 9 years). Thereafter, LandsD will undertake ad-hoc maintenance for the vegetation as and when the need arises.

10.9 Residual Impact Assessment – Upon Implementation of Mitigation Measures

Significance of Residual Landscape Impacts upon Mitigation

10.9.1 Table 10.19 summarises the significance of impacts on the LRs and LCAs, the mitigation measures proposed to mitigate these impacts and the residual impact significance upon implementation of the mitigation measures suggested. LRs/ LCAs are mainly affected by the change in land use and loss of trees.

10.9.2 For LR1, most of the key village areas identified in the LR will be retained. The impact significance before mitigation of LR 1a, LR1c and LR 1e are considered as Insignificant, therefore, the residual impact significance upon mitigation is also considered as Insignificant.

10.9.3 For LR 1f, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Slight of both construction and operation phase. No trees within LR 1f will be affected, only the site formation works at the edge area which may cause minor changes to its existing topography. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase and MM3 at the edge of the site enhance the amenity of the site. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of LR 1f is considered as Insignificant.

10.9.4 For LR 1b, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Moderate of both construction and operation phase. The north edge of this LR would be affected with SHR site extension, around 40 – 50 nos. of trees would be affected. MM1 provides sufficient protection measures to retained trees. MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM4 would help to soften the hard edges of road structure and reduce the visual bulkiness and merge with surrounding environment mutually. MM 7 would help to maintain the visual attractiveness to road users and nearby-residents. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of LR 1b is considered as Slight in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1) and Insignificant in operation stage (year 10).

10.9.5 For LR 1d, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Moderate of both construction and operation phase. The LR would be affected in a small extent by SHR Site and SHR Site Extension, and small part of infrastructure works as well. Around 20 – 25 nos. of trees would be affected. MM1 provides sufficient protection measures to retained trees. MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of LR 1d is considered as Slight in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1) and Insignificant in operation stage (year 10).

10.9.6 For LR 1g, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Substantial of both construction and operation phase. The LR will be affected by SHR site extension, with around 20 nos. of trees affected, half of LR 1g would be significantly changed. MM1 provides sufficient protection measures to retained trees. MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of LR 1g is considered as Moderate in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1) and Slight in operation stage (year 10).

10.9.7 For LR2, it has relatively good compatibility with the Project and has an ability to be easily relocated or rebuilt with low value of existing vegetation among the area. Only LR 2e and LR 2f are unaffected, the impact significance before mitigation of LR 2e and LR 2f are considered as Insignificant, therefore, the residual impact significance upon mitigation is also considered as Insignificant.

10.9.8 For LR 2a, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Substantial of both construction and operation phase. There would be around 190 – 230 nos. of trees affected by HPR site. MM1 provides sufficient protection measures to retained trees. MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM4 and MM5 would help to soften the hard edges of road structure and reduce the visual bulkiness and merge with surrounding environment mutually. MM 7 would help to maintain the visual attractiveness to road users and nearby-residents. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. MM11 would enhance the greenery of proposed structure and merge with surrounding environment mutually. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of LR 2a is considered as Moderate in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1) and Slight in operation stage (year 10).

10.9.9 For LR 2c, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Substantial of both construction and operation phase. There would be up to 240 – 300 nos. of trees would be affected, including Ficus Microcarpa (CEDD-T62) which is suggested to be felled. MM1 provides sufficient protection measures to retained trees. MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM4 and MM5 would help to soften the hard edges of road structure and reduce the visual bulkiness and merge with surrounding environment mutually. MM 7 would help to maintain the visual attractiveness to road users and nearby-residents. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. MM11 would enhance the greenery of proposed structure and merge with surrounding environment mutually. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of LR 2c is considered as Moderate in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1) and Slight in operation stage (year 10).

10.9.10 For LR 2b, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Moderate of both construction and operation phase. The LR would have around 30 – 40 nos. of trees would be affected due to direct conflict with HPR site. MM1 provides sufficient protection measures to retained trees. MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM4 and MM5 would help to soften the hard edges of road structure and reduce the visual bulkiness and merge with surrounding environment mutually. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. MM11 would enhance the greenery of proposed structure and merge with surrounding environment mutually. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of LR 2b is considered as Slight in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1) and Insignificant in operation stage (year 10).

10.9.11 For LR 2d, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Slight of both construction and operation phase. No trees in this LR will be affected. There will be level changes due to site formation works. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase and MM3 at the edge of the site enhance the amenity of the site. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of LR 2d is considered as Insignificant.

10.9.12 For LR 3a, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Substantial of both construction and operation phase. The LR would have around 130 – 150 nos. of trees would be affected, including one Litchi chinensis (CEDD-T23) and one Ficus microcarpa (T503) both suggested to be felled. MM1 provides sufficient protection measures to retained trees. MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM4 would help to soften the hard edges of road structure and reduce the visual bulkiness and merge with surrounding environment mutually. MM 7 would help to maintain the visual attractiveness to road users and nearby-residents. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of LR 3a is considered as Moderate in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1) and Slight in operation stage (year 10).

10.9.13 For LR 3b, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Substantial of both construction and operation phase. The LR would have around 160 – 170 nos. of trees are affected. MM1 provides sufficient protection measures to retained trees. MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM4 would help to soften the hard edges of road structure and reduce the visual bulkiness and merge with surrounding environment mutually. MM 7 would help to maintain the visual attractiveness to road users and nearby-residents. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of LR 3b is considered as Moderate in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1) and Slight in operation stage (year 10).

10.9.14 For LR4, LR 4b and LR 4c are unaffected, the impact significance before mitigation of LR 4b and LR 4c are considered as Insignificant, therefore, the residual impact significance upon mitigation is also considered as Insignificant.

10.9.15 For LR 4a, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Substantial of both construction and operation phase. The LR would have around 90 – 120 nos. of trees are affected due to the proposed Road L7, including 1 Melaleuca cajuputi subsp. Cumingiana (T589) which proposed to be felled. 3 nos. of Aquilaria sinensis in LR 4a will be affected and two of them is proposed to be transplanted to recipient site while the third Aquilaria sinensis is a topped dying tree, therefore transplantation would not be carried out due to its poor condition under MM2. MM1 provides sufficient protection measures to retained trees. MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM4 would help to soften the hard edges of road structure and reduce the visual bulkiness and merge with surrounding environment mutually. MM6 would provide greenery to vertical surfaces and help to reduce the visual bulkiness to viewers. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. MM12 would compensate the same area of the woodland loss of 1.2 ha of mixed woodland of LR4. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of LR 4a is considered as Moderate in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1) and Slight in operation stage (year 10).

10.9.16 For LR 5, the impact significance before mitigation of LR 5.1a – 5.1e, LR 5.1g, LR 5.1m, LR 5.2c, LR 5.2d, LR 5.4a – 5.4d, LR 5.8a – 5.8e, LR 5.5 and LR 5.6 are considered as Insignificant, therefore, the residual impact significance upon mitigation are also considered as Insignificant.

10.9.17 For LR 5.2a, 5.2b, 5.3a and 5.3b, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Moderate of both construction and operation phase. Around 30m of LR 5.2a and LR 5.2b, 20m of LR 5.3a and 26m of LR 5.3b are overlapped with proposed road L7. The affected stream will be collected by the underground culvert along the proposed Road L7. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. MM10 would offer protection to the retained the by providing at least 6m buffer zone along preserved the LR, native/self-sustaining vegetation will be introduced along the reinstated bank of stream within the 6m buffer zone. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of the LRs are considered as Slight in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1) and Insignificant in operation stage (year 10)

For LR 5.1i and 5.1f, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Substantial of both construction and operation phase. LR 5.1f cutting across HPR Site is found to be infeasible due engineering constraints. Retaining whole stream of LR 5.1f would have an impact to at least 3 housing blocks and the PTI, as well as disconnecting the proposed internal roads which cannot be relocated in other area of project site. On the other hand, the proposed site formation level is below the existing LR 5.1f. Therefore, complete avoidance to retain whole LR 5.1f is regarded as impractical. In order to minimize the loss of LR 5.1f, project boundary has been revised in the latest layout plan to avoid upstream area (~208m length) which is identified in Chapter 8 as ecologically sensitive section. Together with other channelized watercourses within project site, remaining section of LR 5.1f (264m length) would be reverted to proposed box culvert/ u-channel and connect to LR 5.7 - Tuen Mun River Channel (TMRC) to maintain their waterflow. Preservation of LR 5.1f upstream would maintain its linkage to adjacent natural landscape (eg. LR 5.1a & LR 5.1b). Affected semi-natural stream LR 5.1i within project site will also be changed into underground culvert, collecting water from LR 5.1e and stormwater from the hillside of woodland and diverted into this offsite LR 5.1f to maintain their hydrological condition. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. MM10 would offer protection to the retained the by providing at least 6m buffer zone along preserved the LR, native/self-sustaining vegetation will be introduced along the reinstated bank of stream within the 6m buffer zone. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of the LRs are considered as Moderate in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1) and Slight in operation stage (year 10)

For LR 5.7, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Slight in construction phase and Insignificant in operation phase. About 20m of LR 5.7 would be affected by the proposed infrastructure works at the operation phase. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. MM10 would offer protection to the retained the by providing at least 6m buffer zone along preserved the LR, native/self-sustaining vegetation will be introduced along the reinstated bank of stream within the 6m buffer zone. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of the LR is considered as Insignificant in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1and year 10).

For LR 5.1j, 5.1h, 5.1k and 5.1l, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Moderate in both construction phase and operation phase. 90m of LR 5.1j, 230m of LR 5.1h, 410m of LR 5.1k and 400m of LR 5.1l would be affected in construction phase. This LR will not be restored in operation phase. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of the LRs are considered as Slight in construction stage and Moderate in operation stage (Day 1) and Slight in operation stage (year 10).

10.9.18 For LR 6, LR 6d is outside the proposed works and no mitigation measure is required. the impact significance before mitigation of LR 6b and 6d are considered as Insignificant, therefore, the residual impact significance upon mitigation are also considered as Insignificant. For LR 6b, MM2 and MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical.

For LR 6a and 6c, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Slight in construction phase and Insignificant in operation phase. Around 45 – 60 nos. of trees in LR 6a and around 15 – 25 nos. of trees in LR 6cwould be affected. Both the LR will be restored in operation phase. MM1 provides sufficient protection measures to retained trees. MM2 and MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM4 and MM5 would help to soften the hard edges of road structure and reduce the visual bulkiness and merge with surrounding environment mutually. MM 7 would help to maintain the visual attractiveness to road users and nearby-residents. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of the LRs are considered as Insignificant in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1and year 10).

10.9.19 For LR 7, the impact significance before mitigation are considered as Insignificant, therefore, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of the LRs are also considered as Insignificant. MM2 and MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM 7 would help to maintain the visual attractiveness to road users and nearby-residents. For LR 8, it is outside the proposed works and no mitigation measure is required.

10.9.20 For LCA1, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Substantial in construction phase and operation phase. The majority of the Site footprint falls within LCA 1. The major change will be due to the alteration of the open, rural and low-rise village landscape character with reasonably high numbers of trees, to a more urban, high rise environment. Approximately 870 – 1,030 trees will be affected in this LCA. Among nine identified large trees with DBH ≥1 m, including two Ficus microcarpa (CEDD-T62 & T503) and one Litchi chinensis (CEDD-T23) within SHR Site and SHR Site Extension would be inevitably felled. MM1 provides sufficient protection measures to retained trees. MM2 and MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM4 and MM5 would help to soften the hard edges of road structure and reduce the visual bulkiness and merge with surrounding environment mutually. MM6 would provide greenery to vertical surfaces and help to reduce the visual bulkiness to viewers. MM 7 would help to maintain the visual attractiveness to road users and nearby-residents. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. MM10 would offer protection to the retained the by providing at least 6m buffer zone along preserved the LR, reintroduce riparian vegetation to the stream, and paved grounds inside the buffer zone to allow planting, recommended native and self-sustaining plant species will be planted along the reinstated bank and 6m buffer zone. MM11 would enhance the greenery of proposed structure and merge with surrounding environment mutually. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of the LCA is considered as Moderate in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1) and Slight in operation stage (year 10).

10.9.21 For LCA2, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Slight in construction phase and Insignificant in operation phase. Only a small area of this LCA is affected by the Project and mainly will involve alteration or upgrade of roads meaning the change is highly compatible with the existing character. No significant changes in topography would be resulted. The small area with site formation and road works would be mutually merged to the existing urban topography. Approximately 70 - 110 trees will be affected in this LCA. MM1 provides sufficient protection measures to retained trees. MM2 and MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM4 and MM5 would help to soften the hard edges of road structure and reduce the visual bulkiness and merge with surrounding environment mutually. MM 7 would help to maintain the visual attractiveness to road users and nearby-residents. MM11 would enhance the greenery of proposed structure and merge with surrounding environment mutually. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of the LCA is considered as Insignificant in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1 and year 10).

10.9.22 For LCA3, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Moderate in construction phase and operation phase. The major source of impact for LCA 3 is due to the permanent loss of woodland to form the proposed Road L7. The proposed site formation level is slightly lowered compare to the existing ground levels of upland. Although a relatively small area of this LCA is affected (under 2.5 ha), it is not compatible with the Project and it is estimated 90 – 120 nos. of trees will be affected. Among two identified large trees with DBH ≥1 m including one Melaleuca cajuputi subsp. Cumingiana (T589) would be inevitably felled. On the other hand, 3 nos. of Aquilaria sinensis in located in hillside would be affected while 2 nos. are recommended to be transplanted under MM2. The Project also affects the border area of this LCA and pushes back its boundary with the rural fringe landscape around Yuen Long. MM1 provides sufficient protection measures to retained trees. MM2 and MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM4 would help to soften the hard edges of road structure and reduce the visual bulkiness and merge with surrounding environment mutually. MM6 would provide greenery to vertical surfaces and help to reduce the visual bulkiness to viewers. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. MM10 would offer protection to the retained the by providing at least 6m buffer zone along preserved the LR, reintroduce riparian vegetation to the stream, and paved grounds inside the buffer zone to allow planting, recommended native and self-sustaining plant species will be planted along the reinstated bank and 6m buffer zone. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of the LCA is considered as Slight in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1) and Insignificant in operation stage (year 10).

10.9.23 For LR2 and LR3 for DP1, the impact significance before mitigation is considered as Slight in construction phase and operation phase. Around 70% of DP1, including the western part and main body of the sewage pumping station are overlapped with LR 2c. The western part of DP1 is mainly landscape area for compensatory trees. Up to 30% of DP1 is located in LR 3a. The eastern part of DP1 is mainly landscape area for compensatory trees. MM3 enhance the amenity of the site and affected trees would be compensated or transplanted for in accordance with DEVB TCW No. 4/2020- Tree Preservation as far as practical. MM5 would help to soften the hard edges of road structure and reduce the visual bulkiness and merge with surrounding environment mutually. MM9 would help to minimize disturbance to the LR during construction phase. MM11 would enhance the greenery of proposed structure and merge with surrounding environment mutually. Through the above-mentioned mitigation works, the residual impact significance upon mitigation of the LCA is considered as Insignificant in construction stage and operation stage (Day 1and year 10).

10.9.24 Table 10.19 summarises the significance of impacts on LRs and LCAs within assessment area and Table 10.20 summarises the significance of impacts on LRs for DP1 after implementation of mitigation measures, assuming mitigation measures are implemented as recommended in Section 10.8. Figure 10.25 and Figure 10.26 provide the LR and LCA impact plans.

Table 10.19 Significance of Residual Landscape Impacts on LRs and LCAs at Construction (C) and Operation (O) upon Mitigation within Assessment Area

LR/ LCA Code	Name		Impact Significance BEFORE Mitigation (Substantial / Moderate / Slight / Insignificant)		Recommended Mitigation Measures		Residual Impact Significance UPON Mitigation (Substantial/ Moderate/ Slight/ Insignificant)
			C	O	C	O	C	O (Day 1)	O (Year 10)
LR1	Village/ Low-rise Residential Development	LR 1a – Siu Hang Tsuen	Insignificant	Insignificant	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM9	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM4, MM7	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 1c – Kai Lun Wai Village	Insignificant	Insignificant			Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 1e – Tuen Mun San Tsuen	Insignificant	Insignificant			Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 1f – Villa Pinada	Slight	Slight			Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 1b – Tsz Tin Tsuen	Moderate	Moderate			Slight	Slight	Insignificant
		LR 1d – San Hing Tsuen	Moderate	Moderate			Slight	Slight	Insignificant
		LR 1g – Chung Shan Area	Substantial	Substantial			Moderate	Moderate	Slight
LR2	Open Storage/ Workshop	LR 2e – Tong Hang Road Open Storage	Insignificant	Insignificant	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM5, MM9	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM4, MM5, MM7, MM11	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 2f – Kwong Shan Tsuen Open Storage	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 2d – San Hing Tsuen Open Storage	Slight	Slight			Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 2b – HPR Workshops (Peripheral greening)	Moderate	Moderate			Slight	Slight	Insignificant
		LR 2a – HPR Container Terminal	Substantial	Substantial			Moderate	Moderate	Slight
		LR 2c – HPR Workshops with Scattered Greening	Substantial	Substantial
LR3	Agricultural Land/ Orchard	LR 3a – Actively Cultivated Land	Substantial	Substantial	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM9	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM4, MM7,	Moderate	Moderate	Slight
		LR 3b – Abandoned Land	Substantial	Substantial
LR4	Hillside Woodland	LR 4a – Mixed Woodland	Substantial	Substantial	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM6, MM9	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM4, MM6, MM12	Moderate	Moderate	Slight
		LR 4b – Plantation Woodland	Insignificant	Insignificant			Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 4c – Mature Secondary Woodland	Insignificant	Insignificant			Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
LR5	Natural/Semi-natural Stream	LR 5.1a – 5.1 e, 5.1g, 5.1m, 5.2c, 5.2d, 5.4a – 5.4d & 5.8a – 5.8e	Insignificant	Insignificant	MM9, MM10	MM10	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 5.2a, 5.2b, 5.3a & 5.3b	Moderate	Moderate			Slight	Slight	Insignificant
		LR 5.1i & 5.1f	Substantial	Substantial			Moderate	Moderate	Slight
	Channelized Watercourse	LR 5.5 & 5.6	Insignificant	Insignificant	MM9, MM10	MM10	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 5.7	Slight	Insignificant			Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 5.1j & 5.1l	Moderate	Moderate			Slight	Moderate	Slight
		LR5.1h & 5.1k	Moderate	Moderate			Slight	Moderate	Slight
LR6	Urban Area	LR 6a – Residential Block	Slight	Insignificant	MM1, MM3, MM5	MM1, MM3, MM4, MM5, MM7	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 6b – Key Transport Route	Insignificant	Insignificant			Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 6c – Public Facilities	Slight	Insignificant			Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 6d – Industrial Blocks	Insignificant	Insignificant	Not necessary	Not necessary	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
LR7	Construction Site		Insignificant	Insignificant	MM2, MM3, MM7	MM2, MM3, MM7	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
LR8	Shrubland-Grassland Mosaic	LR 8a – West Grassland Mosaic	Insignificant	Insignificant	Not necessary	Not necessary	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
		LR 8b – South West Grassland Mosaic	Insignificant	Insignificant			Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
LCA1	Tuen Mun North Rural Fringe		Substantial	Substantial	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM5, MM6, MM9, MM10	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM4, MM5, MM6, MM7, MM10, MM11	Moderate	Moderate	Slight
LCA2	Tuen Mun North Urban Area		Slight	Insignificant	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM5,	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM4, MM5, MM7, MM11	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
LCA3	Castle Peak Foothill		Moderate	Moderate	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM6, MM9, MM10	MM1, MM2, MM3, MM4, MM6, MM10	Slight	Slight	Insignificant

Table 10.20 Significance of Residual Landscape Impacts on LRs at Construction (C) and Operation (O) upon Mitigation for DP1

LR/ LCA Code	Name		Impact Significance BEFORE Mitigation (Substantial / Moderate / Slight / Insignificant)		Recommended Mitigation Measures		Residual Impact Significance UPON Mitigation (Substantial/ Moderate/ Slight/ Insignificant)
			C	O	C	O	C	O (Day 1)	O (Year 10)
LR2	Open Storage/ Workshop	LR 2c – HPR Workshops with Scattered Greening	Slight	Slight	MM3, MM5, MM9	MM3, MM5, MM11	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant
LR3	Agricultural Land/ Orchard	LR 3a – Actively Cultivated Land	Slight	Slight	MM3, MM5, MM9	MM3, MM5, MM11	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant

Significance of Residual Visual Impact upon Mitigation

10.9.25 The proposed mitigation measures, as described in Table 10.18 have been applied to the various impacts and potential residual identified. The potential significance of residual significance threshold on VSRs during operation of the development, completion day 1 and year 10 are provided in Table 10.21.

10.9.26 Photomontages for all VSRs (Refer Figures 10.10 to 10.23) provide a view on the scale and extent of the proposed development. It should be noted that the built form demonstrates the scale and massing only and it does not represent architectural design, finishes or any other related detailed design components.

Construction Phase

10.9.27 Generally, measures to mitigate significance threshold during the construction phase will slightly reduce impacts since the construction area will be screened off from some viewers at lower levels, efforts will be made to reduce light and glare pollution at night. Also, proposed hoarding to reduce visual disturbance generated through construction and offer physical barrier to public passing by construction site at ground-level.

Operation Phase

10.9.28 In addition, soft landscaping works will provide visual amenity to the Project. Generally during operation phase, the visual impact after mitigation will be reduced, particularly for those viewers close to the new development. After soft landscape works being well-implemented including mitigation MM1 – Tree Protection and Preservation; MM2 – Tree Transplanting; MM3 Compensatory Planting and New Tree Planting & MM4 – Roadside Greening, these newly planted vegetation would provide immediate effect which enhance the overall visual quality and amenity of the Project at open space, slope, facilities and new road area.

10.9.29 Views experienced substantially adverse impacts (VSR1 & VSR6) remain substantially adverse for operation (Day 1 & Year 10) upon mitigation. Their significance of impact is both caused by large degradation of continuous ridgeline view. As existing vegetation and village settlements are blocking the view towards ground level of project site, as a result, visual screening/ buffer effects contributed by proposed planting measures (MM3 - 5) could not be perceived at these locations. Therefore, their residual impact remains the same.

10.9.30 On the other hand, views experienced moderately adverse impacts (VSR4, VSR7, VSR9, VSR11, VSR12 & VSR13) remain moderately adverse for operation (Day 1 & Year 10) upon mitigation, except for VSR4 & VSR 14 which would be reduced to slightly adverse on operation (Year 10) upon mitigation.

10.9.31 The visual impact of these views is due to partial blockage of existing visual resources, from a distant location (except for VSR12). Therefore, screening/ buffer effect offered by planting measures are blocked by existing visual component which ground level mitigation is hardly perceived. In the case of VSR12, as it is located on hillside with existing vegetation in the front, lower part of built structure could not be seen and therefore their residual impact remains the same.

10.9.32 Impact on VSR4 due to the high-rise buildings for this Project would be reduced from moderately adverse to slightly adverse on operation (Year 10). As measures for greening of roads and junctions, which also encompass compensatory tree planting, compensatory planting and screen planting are visible from VSR4, where location near ground level. And buffer/ screening effect offered by planting measures would be more effective compared to other VSRs, when proposed vegetation are well-grown to eliminate the visual bulkiness at ground level.

10.9.33 Impact on VSR14 due to proposed building mass of SHR site, DP1 Sewage Pumping Station and PTI structure would be reduced from moderately adverse to slightly adverse on operation (Year 10). With sufficient time provided, landscape works of MM11 could help to soften the hard edge of proposed structure and provide buffer effects eliminate the visual bulkiness with well-grown vegetation at ground level.

10.9.34 Views experienced slightly adverse impacts (VSR2, VSR3, VSR5, VSR8 & VSR10) remain slightly adverse for operation (Day 1 & Year 10) upon mitigation. These VSPs are located far away (ranging from 400 – 1,600m) from the project. The proposed built structures are merged into existing visual components or largely blocked by nearby-architectures. And hence subsequent mitigations are not perceivable.

10.9.35 Proposed noise barrier would also contribute to the overall significance threshold (rather than being a sole source of impact). Material and planting treatment would be provided to maintain the visual attractiveness to road users and nearby-residents, which reduce the visual impact by improving its appearance as much as practical.

10.9.36 In general, most of the key public views to site are from a distance at which the main cause of impact is the blockage of view caused by the high-rise structures. While Detailed Design Measures at construction phase ameliorate proposed architectures, which ensures the built structures integrate with aesthetic architectural treatment, greenery features and chromatic treatment which visually respond to the existing visual context. Visual impact could be partially reduced through the aforementioned aesthetical building treatment. However, it will not necessarily serve to reduce impact ratings which due to visual blockage. Therefore, for most VSRs the same impact rating remains after mitigation, though being slightly improved.

10.9.37 In summary, there are 2 nos. of VSRs (1 & 6) with substantially adverse impact, 5 nos. of VSRs (7, 9, 11, 12 & 13) with moderately adverse impact and 5 nos. of VSRs (2, 3, 5, 8 & 10) with slightly adverse impact on public viewers for both construction phase and operation (Day 1 & Year 10) upon mitigation. VSR4 and VSR14 with moderately adverse impact in construction and operation Day 1 would be reduced to slightly adverse impact in operation Year 10 upon mitigation.

Table 10.21 Significance of Visual Impacts during Construction and Operation Phases Upon Mitigation

VSR	Description	Sensitivity (Low, Medium, High)	Magnitude of Change		Significance Threshold before Mitigation (C & O)	Recommended Mitigation Measures		Residual Significance Threshold Upon Mitigation
			C	O		C	O	C	O (Day 1)	O (Year 10)
1	View from Car Park, Tuen Tsz Wai	High	Large	Large	Substantially adverse	MM8, MM9	MM8 ^(b)	Substantially adverse	Substantially adverse	Substantially adverse
2	View from Public Open Area between Tuen Mun San Tsuen and Botania Villa	Low	Small	Small	Slightly adverse	MM8, MM9	MM8 ^(a)	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse
3	View from Piu Lin Garden, Siu Hang Tsuen	Low	Small	Small	Slightly adverse	MM8, MM9	MM8 ^(b)	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse
4	View from Tsing Lun Road Footbridge	Medium	Intermediate	Intermediate	Moderately adverse	MM3, MM5, MM8, MM9	MM3, MM4, MM5, MM8 & MM7 ^(b)	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse	Slightly adverse
5	View from Kei Lun Wai Children’s Playground	Low	Small	Small	Slightly adverse	MM8, MM9	MM8^(b)	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse
6	View from Po Tong Ha	High	Large	Large	Substantially adverse	MM8, MM9	MM8^(b)	Substantially adverse	Substantially adverse	Substantially adverse
7	View from Raised Public Road Outside Siu Hong MTR Station	Low	Intermediate	Intermediate	Moderately adverse	MM8, MM9	MM8^(b)	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse
8	View from Tsing Chung Koon Road	Low	Small	Small	Slightly adverse	MM8	MM8^(b)	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse
9	View from Miu Fat Monastery Public Viewing Platform	Medium	Intermediate	Intermediate	Moderately adverse	MM5, MM8, MM9	MM4, MM5, MM8 ^(b)	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse
10	View from Tuen Mun Path, Route 1	Low	Small	Small	Slightly adverse	MM8, MM9	MM8^(b)	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse	Slightly adverse
11	View from Trail between Castle Peak and Por Lo Shan	High	Intermediate	Intermediate	Moderately adverse	MM8, MM9	MM8^(b)	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse
12	View from Chung Shan Hillside with Graves	Medium	Large	Large	Moderately adverse	MM1, MM8, MM9	MM1, MM8^(b)	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse
13	View from West Railway heading South-west	Low	Intermediate	Intermediate	Moderately adverse	MM8, MM9	MM8^(b)	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse
14^(a)	View from Hong Po Road Roundabout	Medium	Intermediate	Intermediate	Moderately adverse	MM8, MM9	MM3, MM5, MM8, MM11	Moderately adverse	Moderately adverse	Slightly adverse

Notes: (a) This VSR is selected to represent viewers, mainly drivers who drive from Tsing Lun Road to Hong Po Road and the PDA via roundabout for DP1.

(b) Architectural and engineering design, sensitive architectural and chromatic treatment for building facades are recommended to consider for the design consideration. Besides that, the incorporation of greening features is highly recommended on feasible structural area to create visually pleasing effect, which reduces both landscape and visual impact. On the other hand, by providing colour scheme of chromatic alternation to façade materials and avoid usage of monotonous colour, could improve the visual appearance of building. Those recommendation shall be further considered during the design stage of the Project.

10.10 Cumulative Impacts

10.10.1 Potentially relevant interfacing projects with the present Project are presented in Section 1.8 and their locations are shown in Figures 1.6a and 1.6b. Figure 10.1a and 10.1b shows the boundaries of the major developments that have been identified as being potentially concurrent with the Project, including those of Tuen Mun Area 54. The cumulative landscape impact and visual impacts imposed by these Projects are discussed below, according to the current publicly available information.

10.10.2 Site 1 & 1A, Site 2, Site 3/4 (East), Site 3/4 (West) and Site 4A (West) of Tuen Mun Area 54 are located less than 1km away from our Project Site. Based on the existing information, the completion of the works are before the commencement of our Project, thus, there are unlikely to be concurrent with our project. For the Site 4A (South), Site 4A (East) and Site 5 of Tuen Mun Area 54, they are targeted to be completed in Year 2027, which will be concurrent with our project during the early construction phase, therefore, the cumulative landscape impact for construction and operation phases are anticipated. Based on the current information, Site 4A (South), Site 4A (East) and Site 5 were in an industrial use (i.e. container storage), which is located within the LR of urbanised development, landscape quality and value is considered to be low given the nature of the LR. The residual impact on urbanised development areas will be slight, the new development appears to be quite compatible with the surrounding landscape. With implementation of appropriate mitigation measures for both projects（i.e. transplanting of existing trees and compensatory planting etc.), the cumulative LR and LCA impacts are considered to be slight.

10.10.3 Tuen Mun Area 54 comprises of residential developments, infrastructure works, government/institutional and community facilities, transportation terminus and sewerage infrastructure. Site formation in some development areas and construction of roads and drains are ongoing for Tuen Mun Area 54. With regards to cumulative visual impacts, the tentative completion dates of most of the works under Tuen Mun Area 54 are earlier than this Project. There are potential cumulative impacts for construction and operation phases of Tuen Mun Area 54 and the project, which is assessed in certain VSRs. Please refer to Figure 10.10 to Figure 10.23.

10.10.4 Cumulative visual impact from Tuen Mun Area 54 are reflected on VSRs 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11 & 12. Tuen Mun Area 54 Site 2 are comprised in the existing view of VSRs 4, 5, 7, 9 & 12, as part of the baseline condition of these VSRs. The visual impact raised from construction of remaining sites of Tuen Mun Area 54 would be mostly eliminated, due to the visual blockage by proposed building blocks of the project in the front view (as these VSR are located relatively close to the project sites). While VSRs 10 & 11 are distant from the project site, which are both overlook views located at trail. As there is already existing complex of high-rise component dominating the foreground views in these VSRs, the Tuen Mun Area 54 would be visually compatible with the existing view, which no significant ridgeline or hillside views are obstructed.

10.11 Conclusion

10.11.1 Total eight (8) LRs, three (3) broad LCAs and fourteen (14) VSRs were identified in the Assessment Area. The Project will inevitably result in some landscape impact and visual impacts during construction and operation phases. The existing village/ low-rise character would be transformed into a more urbanized landscape setting after commissioning of the Project. It is not possible to fully mitigate all landscape impacts in relation to loss of natural/semi-natural stream, hillside woodland, agricultural land or orchard for affected LRs and LCAs in the construction period and early operation stage, mainly as long periods of time are required to sufficiently compensate for the associated impacts.

10.11.2 The main impact for the affected LRs (except natural/semi-natural streams) and LCAs would be the change in topography resulting in loss of greenery, which is considered that approximately 1,050 – 1,300 nos. of trees within the PDA boundary will be affected. The proposed development layout plan has reserved open spaces and greening within the sites and along the proposed Road L7 and realigned Hong Po Road for compensation. To compensate the loss of greenery, not less than 1,300 nos. of new trees in different sizes will be proposed. Overall, there will be some adverse effects brought up by the project, which mostly could be eliminated, reduced or offset by proposed mitigation measures. the residual impacts to LRs and LCAs can be reduced to slight to moderate levels eventually.

10.11.3 From visual perspective, considering the large-scale public housing estate on the sites above building platform, the proposed development would inevitably create building mass and site formation that would induce major visual impacts to the village setting. Most of visual impact arising from this development is due to visual blockage. However, the project design has endeavoured every effort to minimise potential impacts to practical minimum.

10.11.4 The placement of housing blocks has taken into consideration of the permeability of views, trying to allow for gaps between buildings to maximize views between the buildings rather than create a solid blockage of views. The proposed light control helps to avoid light and glare disturbance. Broad coverage of planting is efficient to compensate the loss of greenery which would further enhance the visual condition in local context of the development sites. Slope and screening planting would provide additional greenery, buffering offsite environments. The above measures are feasible to minimize the visual disturbance to public viewers as practical.

10.11.5 On the other hand, VSR1 and VSR6 remains substantially adverse upon mitigation measures, due to their location setting in which proposed planting (MM3 - 5) at ground level cannot be observed, and impact of visual blockage could not be effectively reduced by proposed measures. As remedy, Detailed Design Measures are suggested in order to improve façade treatment of built structures, providing better visual impression to public.

10.11.6 In summary, upon mitigation measures of operation year 10, impacts to 7 nos. of VSRs (2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10 & 14) are slightly adverse, 5 nos. of VSRs (7, 9, 11, 12 & 13) are moderately adverse and 2 nos. of VSRs (1 & 6) are substantially adverse. The overall quality of existing VSRs will be moderately adverse, particularly to village or low-rise residential area adjacent to periphery of the development, given that the scale and nature of project is relatively large with high-rise residential blocks. While other residential area with sufficient distance to the project, the proposed blocks would visually merge within high-rise urban development at east and south side of the site, which in general be slight adverse. Therefore, given sufficient time for well-implemented measures and maturity for planting measures, as well as design consideration, the project will not create significant disturbance to general viewing experience and could be integrated to existing environment.

10.11.7 With proper implementation of mitigation measures, the residual landscape and visual impact is perceived to be acceptable with mitigation measures, as stated in EIAO-TMs and EIAO Guidance Note No. 8/2010.

END OF TEXT