|
Consultancy Ref.: AFCD/FIS/02/19 Consultancy Service
for Environmental Impact Assessment Study for Designation of New Fish Culture
Zones
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report for
Establishment of Fish Culture Zone at Mirs Bay
November 2022
|
In accordance with Clause 3.4.7
and Appendix F Requirements for Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) of the
EIA Study Brief, a VIA has been conducted based on mapping with a Geographic
Information System (GIS) and field surveys to help identify the existing
conditions so as to be able to assess the potential visual impacts during
construction and operation and glare associated with the light sources of the
Project. The VIA presented here covers the elements of the Project that are
located above sea level.
This VIA has been prepared according
to Clause 2.1 (vi), Clause 3.2.1 (vi), Clause 3.4.7 and Appendix F
of the EIA Study Brief.
Environmental Impact Assessment
Ordinance (EIAO) legislation (Cap.499, S.16) and the Technical
Memorandum on EIA Process (EIAO-TM), particularly Annexes 10
(Criteria for Evaluating Visual and Landscape Impact, and Impact on Sites of
Cultural Heritage) and 18 (Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact
Assessment) have been referred to in carrying out this assessment.
In addition, the following standards
and guidelines have been referred to for assessing the visual impacts
associated with the Project:
n
Environmental
Impact Assessment Ordinance Guidance Note 8/2010 (Preparation of Landscape and
Visual Impact Assessment under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance);
n
Hong
Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG) issued by the Planning
Department (November 2015), in particular Chapter 11 Urban Design Guidelines;
n
Study
on Landscape Value Mapping of Hong Kong.
The Project site has two main areas,
one is located at the waters to the east of Tap Mun (~1,000 m long and ~1,000 m
wide; equivalent to ~105 hectares in size) while the other is located at the
waters to the east of Kau Lau Wan (~2,000 m long and ~1,500 m wide; equivalent
to ~305 hectares in size) (Figure 7.1).
The Project Site is located in northeast open waters. It is not covered by any
existing outline zoning plan (OZP) (Figure 7.2). To the
west of the Project Site is Lung Keng Kan, a pre-longlisted reclamation site,
and Kau Lau Wan, which consists of green belt, coastal protection area, and
village type development.
The Assessment Area for visual impact
assessment shall be defined by the Visual Envelope of the Project. A Visual
Envelope is an area within which views of the Project will be possible.
Identification of the visual envelope has been achieved by site visit and
desk-top study of topographic maps and photographs, and GIS analysis, to
determine potential visibility of the Project from various locations. GIS
analysis uses known data regarding the proposed built structures to model the area
that can potentially see the developments. It should be noted that GIS
analysis uses topographic data as a baseline, disregarding existing built forms
and vegetation which reduce the actual visual envelope. Figure 7.1 illustrates
the GIS Visual Envelope for this Project.
The visual envelope of the Project
site is determined based on its potential dimensions of 1,000 m x 1,000 m and
2,000 m x 1,500 m across the horizontal plane, with FCZ facilities no higher
than 3 m in height above water (except during maintenance). Considering that
the visual impact of this Project would be mainly associated with the
horizontal field of view of fish farms, it is proposed to use the horizontal
field of view of individual fish farms within the whole FCZ area when assessing
the visual extent of impact for this Project.
Figure 7.1 also gives an indication
of how far viewers are from the Project site. As a viewer moves further away
from the Project site, the visual impact decreases until it is no longer
visible. However, before the point of invisibility is reached, the FCZ would
have reduced in scale such that it no longer has a significant visual effect on
the view.
Boxes 1 and 2 below show that for an
individual fish farm, the horizontal field of view will be visually dominant
for distance <170 m and insignificant further than 2.3
km away, whereas the vertical field of view will be visually evident for
distance <70m and insignificant for distance >340 m. Therefore, the
maximum distance which the fish farm is considered insignificant will be at
>2.3 km.
Having determined the Assessment Area
for the VIA, VSRs have been broadly identified within the visual envelope.
VSRs may include the people who would reside, work, play within, or travel
through the Assessment Area and be potentially under the impact of the proposed
Project.
Subsequently Vantage Points, or
Viewpoints (VPs), were selected. VPs are positions selected to represent some
potential VSRs from where the proposed Project can be viewed, and are selected
to help illustrate the visual change that would be brought about by the
proposed Project. The VPs have been selected to ensure that in combination
they give a good overall representation of how the Project will appear to
different types of VSRs, both near and far and at sea level as well as lower
and higher ground elevations.
Assessment of the sensitivity of VSRs is influenced by
a number of factors including the following:
n
Type
of VSR. VSRs are categorized according to whether the viewer is at home, at
work or school, at play or leisure, or travelling (ranked by the major VSR
types, as described below):
- Residential VSRs – These VSRs are people
living in the area and who view the proposed Project from their homes. They
are considered the most sensitive VSRs due to the character of the view from
their homes having a substantial effect on their perception of quality and
acceptability of their home environment and general quality of life.
- Recreational VSRs – These VSRs are people
engaging in recreational activities such as hikers on established trails and
footpaths, recreational fishers near the coast and outlying islands.
Sensitivity of these VSRs depends on duration of stay, nature of the activity
and how enclosed the location is.
n
Number
of individuals (ranked as very many, many, few or very few);
n
Quality
of existing view (ranked as good, fair or poor);
n
Availability
of alternative views (ranked as yes or no);
n
Degree
of visibility (ranked as full, partial or glimpse);
n
Duration
of view (ranked as long, medium or short); and
n
Frequency
of view (ranked as frequent, occasional or rare).
The sensitivity of each VSR is based
on the values of all the above factors in totality and classified as follows:
n
High:
The
VSR is highly sensitive to any change in their viewing experience.
n
Medium:
The VSR
is moderately sensitive to any change in their viewing experience.
n
Low:
The
VSR is only slightly sensitive to any change in their viewing experience.
The magnitude of change caused by a visual impact is
quantified according to a number of factors including the following:
n
Distance
between the closest source of impact and the VSR (given in meters);
n
Scale
of the development. This is assessed using a number of factors, including:
absolute dimensions of new built structures visible to the VSR; relative
dimensions of the new built structures compared to other structures visible to
the VSRs in their existing view (ranked as small, medium or large);
n
Potential
blockage of view (ranked as full, partial or nil);
n
Duration
of the impacts (ranked as temporary or permanent);
n
Compatibility
of the Project and associated works with the existing and planned landscape in
the vicinity (ranked as good, fair or poor); and
n
Reversibility
of change (ranked as reversible or irreversible).
The magnitude of change caused by
visual impacts on each VSR is based on the values of all the above factors in
totality and classified as follows:
n
Large: VSRs
would suffer a major change in their viewing experience.
n
Intermediate:
VSRs
would suffer a moderate change in their viewing experience.
n
Small: VSRs
would suffer a small change in their viewing experience.
n
Negligible:
VSRs
would suffer no discernible change in their viewing experience.
By understanding the magnitude of
change caused by the various impacts and the sensitivity of the various
sensitive receivers, it is possible to categorize impacts in a logical,
well-reasoned and consistent fashion. Table 7.1 shows the
rationale for dividing the degree of significance into four thresholds, namely
insignificant, slight, moderate, and substantial, depending on the combination
of a magnitude of change and sensitivity of sensitive receiver.
Table 7.1 Relationship between receptor
sensitivity and magnitude of change in defining impact significance
|
|
|
Magnitude of Change
|
|
|
|
Negligible
|
Small
|
Intermediate
|
Large
|
|
Receptor Sensitivity
(VSR)
|
Low
|
Insignificant
|
Slight
|
Slight/ Moderate*
|
Moderate
|
|
Medium
|
Insignificant
|
Slight/ Moderate*
|
Moderate
|
Moderate/ Substantial*
|
|
High
|
Insignificant
|
Moderate
|
Moderate/ Substantial*
|
Substantial
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*In those instances where the lower level of impact is
predicted, this will be justified in the description of the impact
The four thresholds for the degree of
significance are explained below. Noting impacts can be either adverse or
beneficial, it should be noted that any impacts described in the text of the
Report are assumed to be adverse unless specifically identified otherwise.
n
Substantial: Adverse / beneficial
impact where the proposed Project will cause significant deterioration or
improvement in existing landscape quality.
n
Moderate: Adverse / beneficial
impact where the proposed Project will cause a noticeable deterioration or
improvement in existing landscape quality.
n
Slight: Adverse / beneficial
impact where the proposed Project will cause barely perceptible deterioration
or improvement in existing landscape quality.
n
Insignificant:
No
discernible change in the existing landscape quality
Having identified and ranked the
significance of potential impacts, measures, if required, will be proposed to
mitigate the impacts. Firstly, means by which impacts can be avoided will be
considered, then possible means that might reduce the impact magnitude, and
also measures that potentially enhance existing visual quality. To ensure their
effectiveness throughout the construction and operation phases of the Project
and associated works, the relevant responsible parties for the implementation
and management / maintenance of the proposed mitigation measures will be
identified as appropriate.
As outlined in Section 7.1,
the photomontages will illustrate options of design schemes as well as
mitigation measures by showing baseline conditions, Day 1 with no mitigation
measures, Day 1 with mitigation measures and Year 10 with mitigation measures.
An overall assessment of the
acceptability, or otherwise, of visual impacts in accordance with the five
criteria set out in Annex 10 of the EIAO-TM will be provided,
considering the guidelines in paragraph 3.11 of Environmental Impact Assessment
Ordinance GN No. 8/2010.
As detailed in Figure 7.1, Figure 7.3 and
Figure 7.4,
the indicative location of the Project site is in open waters, east to both Tap
Mun and Kau Lau Wan. The Project is located in a relatively open sea area with
high degree of visibility to a large area from a visual perspective.
The Project site will be visible to
east facing coastline along Tap Mun, north facing coastline along Kau Lau Wan,
coastline along Nam She Wan, elevated areas of Sai Kung East Country Park, and
Tai Tan Country Trail (Figure 7.1).
Overall, the VSRs have been
identified within the predicted Visual Envelope, including two types as
identified in the methodology: recreational and residential. The VSRs include
receivers at ground level, sea level and on elevated ground. The quality of
most existing views for these VSRs affected by the FCZ, are generally good,
respectively, with a high degree of visibility to natural views containing
limited or no anthropogenic structures. The details of VSRs are summarised in
Table 7.2 which includes their sensitivity.
Table 7.2 VSRs within the Predicted Visual
Envelope
|
VSR ID /
Representative VP
|
Representative
VP
|
VSR Type
|
Distance
with the FCZ (m)
|
Quality
of Existing View
|
Alternative
Views
|
Receiver
Population
|
Duration
of View
|
Frequency
of View
|
Degree of
Visibility
|
Sensitivity
|
|
VSR 1 – Visitors at Tap Mun
campsite
|
VP1
|
Recreational
|
911
|
Good
|
Yes
|
Few
|
Short
|
Occasional
|
Full
|
Medium
|
|
VSR 2a – Visitors at Kau Lau Wan
|
VP2
|
Recreational
|
1,526
|
Good
|
Yes
|
Few
|
Short
|
Occasional
|
Full
|
Medium
|
|
VSR 2b –Residents at Kau Lau Wan
|
Residential
|
Long
|
Frequent
|
High
|
|
VSR 3 – Visitors at Nam She Wan
beach
|
VP3
|
Recreational
|
448
|
Good
|
Yes
|
Few
|
Short
|
Occasional
|
Full
|
Medium
|
|
VSR 4 – Hikers / recreational
viewers from
elevated areas of Nam She Wan
and Sai Kung East Country Park
|
VP4
|
Recreational
|
1,174
|
Good
|
Yes
|
Few
|
Short
|
Occasional
|
Full
|
Medium
|
|
VSR 5 – Hikers at Tai Tan Country
Trail
|
VP5
|
Recreational
|
3,690
|
Good
|
Yes
|
Few
|
Short
|
Occasional
|
Full
|
Medium
|
As shown in Figure 7.1,
computer modelling suggests sections of coastal areas
east of Tap Mun, Kau Lau Wan and north of Nam She Wan are within the
visible area for the Project site. Broad VSR areas and specific locations of VPs are
illustrated in Figure
7.1 and 7.3. It should be noted that Kung Chau
and Port Island to the north of the Project site is not accessible by public
transport and there is no dedicated hiking trail at these two locations.
Therefore, there is no viewpoint identified to the north of the Project site.
In addition, there is no island on the eastern part of the Project site.
Therefore, no viewpoint is identified to the east of the Project site.
Generally VPs have been selected to
represent the most affected VSRs and a total of 5 nos. of VPs have been
selected from which to develop photomontages. Figure 7.1 shows
the suggested VP locations and their corresponding details are provided below.
Figure 7.4
shows the aerial photos of the suggested VP locations. Figure 7.5a&b – 7.9&b show the
existing conditions of VP1- VP5.
VPs selected to represent
VSRs of the proposed Mirs Bay FCZ
Views from Country Parks,
Outlying Islands and Scenic Lookouts
VP1 - Tap Mun. VP1 is selected to
represent visitors at a popular lookout point at Tap Mun. The selected VP is
an open area and popular camp site near the south-eastern cliff of Tap Mun
which provides a panoramic view of Mirs Bay. It is located approximately 911 m
west of the Project site. Table 7.2 shows the value and quality
of view of the sea from this VP is considered to be good. This VSR has
alternative views to the sea. The number of VSRs is few due to the limited
number of visitors at Tap Mun campsite. The duration and frequency of view is
short and occasional as this VSR only spends a limited amount of time at the
campsite during holidays. This VSR has a full degree of visibility. Therefore,
VSR 1 is considered to have medium sensitivity.
VP2 - Kau Lau Wan. VP2 is selected to
represent visitors of Kau Lau Wan (VSR 2a) and residents of Kau Lau Wan (VSR
2b). The selected VP is located at the northern coastline of Kau Lau Wan which
mainly provides a view of the FCZ located at northern Mirs Bay. It is located
approximately 1,526 m southwest of the Project site. Table 7.2 shows
the value and quality of view of the sea from this VP is considered to be
good. Both VSRs have alternative views to the sea. The number of VSRs is few
due to the limited number of visitors (VSR 2a) and residents (VSR 2b) at Tap
Mun. This VSR has a full degree of visibility.
For visitors at Kau Lau Wan (VSR 2a),
although they have short and occasional view of the Project, they are
recreational VSR, who aim to enjoy the view, hence having medium sensitivity.
For residents at Kau Lau Wan (VSR 2b), their sensitivity is high, since they
live in the area, and their duration of view is long and frequent.
VP3 - Nam She Wan. VP3 is selected to
represent visitors at the beach. The selected VP will mainly provide an
overall view of the FCZ next to Nam She Wan at sea level. It is located
approximately 448 m south of the Project site. Table 7.2 shows
the value and quality of view of the sea from this VP is considered to be
good. This VSR has alternative views to the sea. The number of VSRs is few due
to the limited number of visitors at Nam She Wan beach. The duration and
frequency of view is short and occasional as this VSR only spends a limited
amount of time at the beach during holidays. This VSR has a full degree of
visibility. Therefore, VSR 3 is considered to have medium sensitivity.
VP4 - Sai Kung East Country Park. VP4 is selected to
represent hikers visiting the elevated areas along the coastline of Nam She
Wan. The selected VP is located at Sharp Peak, a well-known hiking destination
at Sai Kung East Country Park. Sharp peak has an elevation of ~460m and
provides a panoramic view of Mirs Bay. This VP provides a closer view of the
Project site located near Nam She Wan. It is located approximately 1,174 m
south of the Project site. Table 7.2 shows the value and quality
of view of the sea from this VP is considered to be good. This VSR has
alternative views to the sea. The number of VSRs is few due to the limited
number of hikers visiting Sai Kung East Country Park. The duration and
frequency of view is short and occasional as this VSR only spends a limited
amount of time along the trail during holidays. This VSR has a full degree of
visibility. Therefore, VSR 4 is considered to have medium sensitivity.
VP5 - Tai Tan Country Trail. VP5 is selected to
represent hikers visiting the Tai Tan Country Trail near the coastline of Sai
Kung West Country Park. The selected VP is located at a hiking trail and will
provide occasional view of the Mirs Bay FCZ from the viewing window between Tap
Mun and Kau Lau Wan. It is located approximately 3,690 m west of the Project
site. Table 7.2 shows the value and quality of view of the sea
from this VP is considered to be good. This VSR has alternative views to the
sea. The number of VSRs is few due to the limited number of hikers visiting Tai
Tan Country Trail. The duration and frequency of view is short and occasional
as this VSR only spends a limited amount of time along the trail during holidays.
This VSR has a full degree of visibility. Therefore, VSR 5 is considered to
have medium sensitivity.
Section 2 provides an overview of
the Project. The key components which may cause visual impacts are listed
below. Construction visual impacts are expected to be minimal and may be
caused by:
n
Setup
of fish rafts / cages, which includes: on-site assembly and anchoring of the
fish rafts / cages, small number of marine vessels will be used as supporting
vessels; and
n
Provision
of auxiliary facilities, such as storage and shelters for fish farmers.
Operational visual impacts are
expected to be minimal and arise from:
n
The
presence and operation of the FCZ, including night time lighting for the sake
of safety purpose.
The construction of the Project site,
including towing the fish rafts / cages to the Site, assembly and anchoring of
the fish rafts / cages and provision of auxiliary facilities would normally
take a few weeks for each fish raft.
During operation phase, as mentioned in Section 2.6.2,
four types of advanced aquaculture technologies, i.e. floating gravity cage;
submersible gravity cage; integrated multi-trophic aquaculture; and
semi-submersible steel truss cage, are considered suitable for this Project. Since the materials
adopted in the fish rafts / cages are durable compared to traditional cages,
the operation of the fish rafts / cages in the Project site based on advanced
aquaculture technologies would be more than 10 years without major repair.
As illustrated in Figures 7.1, 7.3 and 7.4, the
predicted Visual Envelope for the Project is relatively large and VSR groups
have been identified. Five representative VPs have been selected to represent
these VSRs.
Photomontages have been prepared from
the VPs to illustrate the existing conditions, as well as conceptual visual
impacts, for all of: impacts at Day 1 of operation without implementation of
mitigation/ enhancement measures; impacts at Day 1 of operation with
implementation of mitigation/ enhancement measures and residual impacts at Year
10 of operation with implementation of mitigation/ enhancement measures. The
photomontages supplement the visual changes described in the text.
Photomontages showing the presence of the FCZ help illustrate that the
magnitude of visual change for all VSRs are negligible to intermediate. Those
VSRs that are closer to the FCZ are expected to experience relatively higher
magnitude of change. It should be noted that detailed information on the type
of advanced aquaculture
technologies as well as the number, size and separation distance of the fish rafts /
cages is not available at the current stage. Such information will only be
available during the later detailed design stage, subject to the
mariculturists’ proposals on the type of advanced technologies to suit their
business need for agreement with AFCD. The photomontages are thus prepared for
illustration purpose only.
The construction of the Project will
take a few weeks for each fish raft. However, due to the short distance (911 m)
to the Project, the construction activities will be noticeable, and the
magnitude of change is considered small. The resulting significance during
construction is considered slight.
The photomontage in Figure 7.5a&b
shows the Project site from this viewpoint. Since the FCZ facilities will not
be higher than 3 m in height above water (except during maintenance), only the
upper part of the fish rafts / cages would be exposed above the water, they
would only block part of the view. The scale of development is medium as this
VP can view both the northern and southern FCZ. As the fish rafts / cages adopt
simple design (buoyancy collar system and a weighted net enclosure suspended
beneath), they have good compatibility with the surrounding seascape. The
duration of impact is temporary during construction phase and permanent during
operation phase; and the impact is reversible for both phases. Due to the short
distance to the Project (911 m), the Project site will be noticeable, and the
magnitude of change is considered small. The resulting significance during
operation is considered slight.
The construction of the Project will
take a few weeks for each fish raft. Due to the considerable distance (1,526
m) to the Project, the construction activities will not be noticeable, and the
magnitude of change is considered negligible. For visitors at Kau Lau Wan (VSR
2a), although they have short and occasional view of the Project, they are
recreational VSR, who aim to enjoy the view, hence having medium sensitivity.
For residents at Kau Lau Wan (VSR 2b), their sensitivity is high, since they
live in the area, and their duration of view is long and frequent. As the
magnitude of change is considered negligible, the resulting significance during
construction for both VSRs is considered insignificant.
The photomontage in Figure 7.6a&b
shows the Project site from this viewpoint. Since the FCZ facilities will not
be higher than 3 m in height above water (except during maintenance), only the
upper part of the fish rafts / cages would be exposed above the water, they
would only block part of the view, and the scale of development is small. In
addition, as the fish rafts / cages adopt simple design (buoyancy collar system
and a weighted net enclosure suspended beneath), they have good compatibility
with the surrounding seascape. The duration of impact is temporary during
construction phase and permanent during operation phase; and the impact is
reversible for both phases. Given there is considerable distance to the Project
(1,526 m), the viewpoint is horizontal to the sea, and the FCZ facilities’
above water heights are limited to 3 m except during maintenance (not visible
in horizontal viewing angle), the Project site is inconspicuous, and the
magnitude of change is considered negligible. As suggested in the previous
section, Kau Lau Wan’s visitors and residents are respectively considered to
have medium and high sensitivity. Therefore, the resulting significance during
operation is considered insignificant.
The construction of the Project will
take a few weeks for each fish raft. However, due to the short distance (448
m) to the Project, the construction activities will be noticeable, and the
magnitude of change is considered small. The resulting significance during construction
is considered slight.
The photomontage in Figure 7.7a&b
shows the Project site from this viewpoint. Since the FCZ facilities will not
be higher than 3 m in height above water (except during maintenance), only the
upper part of the fish rafts / cages would be exposed above the water, they
would only block part of the view, and the scale of development is small. In
addition, as the fish rafts / cages adopt simple design (buoyancy collar system
and a weighted net enclosure suspended beneath), they have good compatibility
with the surrounding seascape. The duration of impact is temporary during
construction phase and permanent during operation phase; and the impact is
reversible for both phases. Due to the short distance to the Project (448 m),
the Project site will be noticeable, and the magnitude of change is considered
small. The resulting significance during operation is considered slight.
The construction of the Project will
take a few weeks for each fish raft. Despite the considerable distance to the
Project (1,174 m), since the viewpoint is at a high altitude, the construction
activities will be noticeable for both the northern and southern parts of the
FCZ, and the magnitude of change is considered intermediate. The resulting
significance during construction is considered moderate.
The photomontage in Figure 7.8a&b
shows the Project site from this viewpoint. Since the FCZ facilities will not
be higher than 3 m in height above water (except during maintenance), only the
upper part of the fish rafts / cages would be exposed above the water, they
would only block part of the view. The scale of development is medium as this
VP can view both the northern and southern parts of the FCZ. In addition, as
the fish rafts / cages adopt simple design (buoyancy collar system and a
weighted net enclosure suspended beneath), they have good compatibility with
the surrounding seascape. The duration of impact is temporary during
construction phase and permanent during operation phase; and the impact is
reversible for both phases. Despite the considerable distance to the Project
(1,174 m), since the viewpoint is at a high altitude, it can view both the
northern and southern parts of the FCZ. The magnitude of change is considered
intermediate. The resulting significance during operation is considered moderate.
The construction of the Project site
will take a few weeks for each fish raft. Due to the considerable distance to
the Project (3,690 m), the construction activities will not be noticeable, and
the magnitude of change is considered negligible. The resulting significance
during construction is considered insignificant.
The photomontage in Figure 7.9a&b
shows the Project site from this viewpoint. Since the FCZ facilities will not
be higher than 3 m in height above water (except during maintenance), only the
upper part of the fish rafts / cages would be exposed above the water, they
would only block part of the view and the scale of development is small. As
the fish rafts / cages adopt simple design (buoyancy collar system and a
weighted net enclosure suspended beneath), they have good compatibility with
the surrounding seascape. The duration of impact is temporary during
construction phase and permanent during operation phase; and the impact is
reversible for both phases. The VP has a considerable distance to the Project
(3,690 m). Hence, the magnitude of change is considered negligible. The
resulting significance during operation is considered insignificant.
Table 7.3 Magnitude of Change
|
VSR ID /
Representative VP
|
Representative
VP
|
Distance
with the FCZ (m)
|
Blockage
of View (Full / Partial / Nil)
|
Scale of
Development (Large / Medium / Small)
|
Compatibility
with Surrounding Seascape (Good / Fair / Poor)
|
Duration
of Impact (Temporary / Permanent)
|
Reversibility
of Impact (Reversible / Irreversible)
|
Magnitude
of Change
(Large /
Intermediate / Small / Negligible)
|
|
Construction
|
Operation
|
|
VSR 1 – Visitors at Tap Mun
campsite
|
VP1
|
911
|
Partial
|
Medium
|
Good
|
Construction phase:
Temporary;
Operation phase: Permanent
|
Reversible for both construction
and operation phases
|
Small
|
Small
|
|
VSR 2a – Visitors at Kau Lau Wan
|
VP2
|
1,526
|
Partial
|
Small
|
Good
|
Construction phase:
Temporary;
Operation phase: Permanent
|
Reversible for both construction
and operation phases
|
Negligible
|
Negligible
|
|
VSR 2b – Residents at Kau Lau Wan
|
|
VSR 3 – Visitors at Nam She Wan
beach
|
VP3
|
448
|
Partial
|
Small
|
Good
|
Construction phase:
Temporary;
Operation phase: Permanent
|
Reversible for both construction
and operation phases
|
Small
|
Small
|
|
VSR 4 – Hikers / recreational
viewers from
elevated areas of Nam She Wan and
Sai Kung East Country Park
|
VP4
|
1,174
|
Nil
|
Medium
|
Good
|
Construction phase:
Temporary;
Operation phase: Permanent
|
Reversible for both construction
and operation phases
|
Intermediate
|
Intermediate
|
|
VSR 5 – Hikers at Tai Tan Country
Trail
|
VP5
|
3,690
|
Partial
|
Small
|
Good
|
Construction phase:
Temporary;
Operation phase: Permanent
|
Reversible for both construction
and operation phases
|
Negligible
|
Negligible
|
Table 7.4 Visual Impacts Prior to Mitigation
|
VSR ID /
Representative VP
|
Representative VP
|
VSR Sensitivity
|
Magnitude of Change
(Large /
Intermediate / Small / Negligible)
|
Impact Significance
threshold BEFORE Mitigation
(Substantial/
Moderate/ Slight/ Insignificant)
|
|
Construction
|
Operation
|
Construction
|
Operation
|
|
VSR 1 – Visitors at Tap Mun
campsite
|
VP1
|
Medium
|
Small
|
Small
|
Slight
|
Slight
|
|
VSR 2a – Visitors at Kau Lau Wan
|
VP2
|
Medium
|
Negligible
|
Negligible
|
Insignificant
|
Insignificant
|
|
VSR 2b – Residents at Kau Lau Wan
|
High
|
|
VSR 3 – Visitors at Nam She Wan
beach
|
VP3
|
Medium
|
Small
|
Small
|
Slight
|
Slight
|
|
VSR 4 – Hikers / recreational
viewers from elevated areas of Nam She Wan and Sai Kung East Country Park
|
VP4
|
Medium
|
Intermediate
|
Intermediate
|
Moderate
|
Moderate
|
|
VSR 5 – Hikers at Tai Tan Country
Trail
|
VP5
|
Medium
|
Negligible
|
Negligible
|
Insignificant
|
Insignificant
|
The above analysis examined the
visual impacts of the Project during daylight hours. Night-lighting will be
used for safety purpose in this Project. Detailed night lighting
specifications are not available at this preliminary design stage, however, a
preliminary assessment can be made based on similar developments. It is assumed
that the light sources will generally be of low intensity, the orientation of
light will point towards to the fish rafts / cages, and will not be pointing
horizontally and to any VSRs. In addition, no mirrors or polished materials
will be installed on the fish rafts / cages, reflectance of light will be low.
Therefore, the night lighting and glare impact is considered acceptable.
The assessment made in Section
7.8 shows that visual impacts arising from the Project without any
mitigation or enhancement measures in place are between insignificant to
moderate. The following mitigation measures are proposed to minimise the
visual impacts:
n
VM1
– Construction period. Pre-construction and construction period for the Project
site should be reduced as far as practical to lower visual impact;
n
VM2
– Sensitive design of the fish rafts / cages. The new structures will be designed
in accordance with relevant marine safety standards and regulations. Sensitive
architectural design will be considered where practicable. This should take
into account material texture, colour, finishes to structures to ensure the
fish rafts / cages blend into the existing context, cause least disturbance to
the existing seascape, and are the most visually appealing. Please refer to Figure 7.5b, Figure 7.6b, Figure 7.7b, Figure 7.8b and Figure 7.9b for the
implementation of VM2;
n
VM3
– Reinstatement. After operation, the open water occupied by the Project site will be
reinstated to their former state, i.e. the ‘existing view’ (top photo) shown in
Figure 7.5a, Figure 7.6a, Figure 7.7a, Figure 7.8a and Figure 7.9a;
n
VM4
– Night-time lighting control. Light intensity and beam directional angle should be
controlled at the Project site at the design stage to reduce light pollution and
glare (e.g. hooded lights, specific directional focus, etc.). In addition,
lighting will be limited to auxiliary structures to reduce night-time impacts.
Table
7.5 Un-mitigated and Mitigated Impacts
at the VSRs
|
VSR ID /
Representative VP
|
Un-Mitigated Visual
Impact
|
Recommended
Mitigation Measure
|
Mitigated Impact
(Substantial/ Moderate/ Slight/ Insignificant)
|
|
Construction
|
Operation
|
|
Construction
|
Operation Day 1
|
Operation Year 10
|
|
VSR 1 – Visitors at Tap Mun
campsite
|
Slight
|
Slight
|
VM1-4
|
Insignificant to Slight
|
Insignificant to Slight
|
Insignificant to Slight
|
|
VSR 2a – Visitors at Kau Lau Wan
|
Insignificant
|
Insignificant
|
VM1-4
|
Insignificant
|
Insignificant
|
Insignificant
|
|
VSR 2b – Residents at Kau Lau Wan
|
|
VSR 3 – Visitors at Nam She Wan
beach
|
Slight
|
Slight
|
VM1-4
|
Insignificant
|
Insignificant
|
Insignificant
|
|
VSR 4 – Hikers / recreational
viewers from elevated areas of Nam She Wan and Sai Kung East Country Park
|
Moderate
|
Moderate
|
VM1-4
|
Slight to Moderate
|
Slight to Moderate
|
Slight to Moderate
|
|
VSR 5 – Hikers at Tai Tan Country
Trail
|
Insignificant
|
Insignificant
|
VM1-4
|
Insignificant
|
Insignificant
|
Insignificant
|
The assessment made in Section
7.7 shows that visual impacts arising from the Project prior to any
mitigation or enhancement measures in place, are between insignificant to
moderate.
By operation, auxiliary facilities
will have been removed. Therefore with sensitive design of the new structures
(materials, textures, colours) and careful design of lighting, impacts would
further reduce at operation day 1 for the Project site. The new structures are
expected to blend in to the seascape and residual visual impacts will be
insignificant to slight for VSR 1; insignificant for VSR 2a, VSR 2b, VSR 3 and
VSR 5. However, given VSR 4 is an elevated viewpoint without blockage of view,
the residual visual impacts would be slight to moderate. As VSR 4 is a
recreational VSR, the hikers at Nam She Wan and Sai Kung East Country Park will
not stay at the elevated areas for a long time in general. As such,
significant adverse visual impacts are not expected.
Overall, no unacceptable residual
visual impact is expected.
As Section 7.8.5
mentioned, VP5 can view both this Project’s northern part of the FCZ and also
the proposed Outer Tap Mun FCZ. However, with the mitigation or enhancement
measures in place, the residual impact would be reduced to insignificant for
this VP. The Project may have the potential to interact with the proposed
establishment of FCZ at Wong Chuk Kok Hoi, subject to the timing of completion
of legislative exercise to amend the Schedule to the Fish Culture Zone
(Designation) Order (Cap. 353B). However, due to its considerable distance
with Wong Chuk Kok Hoi (6,405 m), cumulative impacts are not anticipated.
A number of measures to be
implemented during design and construction of the Project are recommended in Section
7.9, to further enhance the visual elements associated with the
Project. Design measures such as for the design of the new fish rafts / cages
are recommended to be integrated into the design and construction stage of the
Project as early as possible.
As no tree felling, transplanting or
compensatory planting is required for the Project and visual enhancement
measures would be provided during the construction phase, therefore no specific
EM&A programme is required.
A visual impact assessment has been
undertaken for Project site at Mirs Bay. The VSRs were identified and assessed
based on their sensitivity and magnitude of change. Four visual mitigation
measures are proposed to minimise the visual impacts. Given the sensitive
design of the new structures, medium scale of development and good
compatibility with the surrounding seascape of the structures, residual visual
impacts of the Project will be subsequently considered as between insignificant
and slight to moderate. No unacceptable residual visual impact is expected.
Regarding cumulative visual impacts,
as Section 7.8.5 has mentioned, VP5 can view both this Project’s
northern part of the FCZ and also the proposed Outer Tap Mun FCZ. However,
with the mitigation or enhancement measures in place, the residual impact would
be reduced to insignificant for this VP. Other cumulative visual impacts with
the proposed Wong Chuk Kok Hoi FCZ are not anticipated.
According to Annex 10 of
the Technical Memorandum on the Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM)
the visual impacts are considered acceptable with mitigation measures.
