(a)
Air
Quality Impact
(b)
Noise
Impact
(c)
Water
Quality Impact
(d)
Sewerage
and Sewage Treatment Implications
(e)
Waste
Management Implications
(f)
Land
Contamination
(g)
Ecological
Impact
(h)
Fisheries
Impact
(i)
Landscape
and Visual Impact
(j)
Cultural
Heritage Impact
(k)
Hazard
to Life
(l)
Landfill
Gas Hazard
(m)
Electric
and Magnetic Fields
18.1.1.2
The
findings of the EIA Study have determined the likely nature and extent of
environmental impacts predicted to arise from the construction and operation of
the Project. During the EIA process,
specific environmental control and mitigation measures have been identified and
incorporated into the planning and design of the Project to ensure compliance
with environmental legislation and standards during both the construction and
operation phases. An environmental
monitoring and audit (EM&A) programme has also
been developed to check project compliance with environmental legislation and
standards. These are presented in a
separate, stand-alone EM&A Manual. The
Implementation Schedule listing the recommended mitigation measures is
presented in Section 17.
18.1.1.3
A
summary of the environmental outcomes/benefits that have accrued from the
environmental considerations and analysis during the EIA study and the
implementation of environmental control measures of the Project are presented
in the sections below. This has included
specific assessment for the Schedule 2 Designated Projects (DP) subject to
environmental permit application under this Study. The summary of key assessment assumptions and
limitations of methodologies and summary of environmental impacts are presented
in Appendix 18.1 and Appendix 18.2, respectively.
18.2.1
Environmental
Designs Recommended and Environmentally Friendly Options Incorporated in the
Preferred Option
18.2.1.1
Environmental
aspects considered in the selection of preferred option, design and
construction method of the Project are detailed in Section 2. The following environmental
designs and environmentally friendly options have been incorporated into the
preferred option to avoid / minimise potential environmental impacts associated
with the Project and to create an eco-friendly, low-carbon community and
sustainable development.
Avoidance of Encroachment on Recognized Sites of Conservation Importance
/ Ecologically Sensitive Sites
18.2.1.2
The
preferred option has avoided encroaching on any recognised sites of
conservation importance and ecologically / environmentally sensitive areas, such
as the Clear Water Bay Country Park, Coastal Protection Area and coral
recipient sites.
Optimisation of Reclamation Extent
and Preservation of Natural Shoreline
18.2.1.3
The
reclamation extent of TKO 132 has been optimised and reduced to minimise the loss
of natural shoreline. Reducing direct impact to natural shoreline in western
Junk Bay from 790m to 512m. Approximately
1km of natural shoreline can be maintained in the preferred option.
Incorporation of Eco-shoreline
Design
18.2.1.4
The
seawall of the proposed reclamation at TKO 137 will be provided with
eco-shoreline that integrates robust seawall and marine infrastructure with
designs that create the ecological environments required by marine habitats. A variation of the shoreline that coheres
three ecological strata—sub-tidal, inter-tidal, and terrestrial—is proposed for
the Project.
Adoption of
Stepped Building Heights Design
18.2.1.5
A
building height strategy is applied to form a pleasant vertical image of the
waterfront neighbourhood. A reduction in
development height from the hinterland to the waterfront area has been adopted
to enhance variety in building height and massing. A stepped building height profile descending
from the northeast to the southwest and towards the waterfront is proposed with
respect to the mountain backdrop. The
stepped down building height not only reduces potential visual impact to the
residents of Siu Sai Wan, but also avoids “wall effect” along the coastal area, thereby improving air ventilation in TKO 137
area.
Provision of Sustainable Transport
Infrastructure to Promote Low-carbon Living
18.2.1.6
A
pedestrian-friendly environment and a robust cycling network are proposed to
promote walkability and cycling for low-carbon living. The Project will provide
a robust cycling network which link effectively to the existing and planned
cycling tracks within and outside the Project.
The proposed cycling network will connect to the existing tracks from
Wan Po Road to create a continuous cycling environment that extends to other
destinations beyond the Project area.
Routes within the Project will be provided parallel to the major
roadways to serve commuting needs.
Appropriate Planning of Building
Configuration and Setback
18.2.1.7
With appropriate planning on building
configuration and setback from roads, potential road traffic noise impact on
future noise sensitive uses within the development would be minimised.
The potential noise impacts could be alleviated
by the use of low-noise road surfacing, acoustic
windows and / enhanced acoustic balcony, blank wall, fixed window,
architectural fin, etc., thereby avoiding the use of roadside noise barriers or
enclosures. Without roadside noise
barriers or enclosures, the associated visual impacts and bird collisions would
also be avoided / minimised.
Adoption of Non-dredged
Reclamation
18.2.1.8
Non-dredged
reclamation with in-situ ground treatment methods (including marine-based deep
cement mixing and land-based jet grouting) would be adopted to avoid and
minimise the associated water quality impacts from dredging and additional
filling, the waste management implications from sediment disposal and the
secondary environmental impacts from induced marine traffic.
Adoption of Environmentally Friendly
Construction Method
18.2.1.1
The
precast method would be adopted for the construction of the proposed marine
viaduct to reduce the overall C&D materials to be generated on-site,
shorten construction duration and minimise on-site environmental impacts (e.g.
dust and noise) on nearby sensitive receivers.
18.2.2
Key
Environmental Problem Avoided
·
Avoidance
of direct impact on declared monuments, graded historic buildings and sites of
archaeological interest;
·
Avoidance
of direct impact on recognized sites of conservation importance / ecological
sensitive sites;
·
Minimisation
of loss of natural shoreline with optimised reclamation extent;
·
Minimisation
of potential visual impact and “wall effect” along the coastal area with the
stepped down building height strategy;
·
Minimisation
of potential water quality and marine sediment generation with the adoption of
non-dredged reclamation method; and
·
Minimisation
of C&D material generation and environmental impacts during marine viaduct
construction with the adoption of precast segment method.
18.2.3
Environmental
Benefits of Environmental Protection Measures Recommended
18.2.3.1
This
section outlines the environmental benefits of key environmental protection
measures recommended. A list of key
mitigation measures for each of the Schedule 2 DP which would apply for
Environmental Permit based on this EIA study is outlined in Appendix 18.3.
Air Quality
18.2.3.2
With
the implementation of dust suppression measures stipulated in Air Pollution
Control (Construction Dust) Regulation and good site practices, the
requirements in DEVB TC(W) No. 13/2020 – Timely Application of Temporary
Electricity and Water Supply for Public Works Contracts and Wider Use of
Electric Vehicles in Public Works Contracts, and the measures to minimise the
exhaust emission from non-road mobile machinery (NRMMs), no adverse air quality impact would be
anticipated during the construction phase.
18.2.3.3
Cumulative air quality impact
from the operation of the proposed effluent polishing plant (EPP), Construction
Waste Handling Facility (CWHF), Public Fill Transfer Facility (PFTF), and Concrete
Batching Plant (CBP) under the RODP, vehicular emissions from proposed roads
and existing roads within 500 m assessment areas, existing portal, marine
traffic and existing industrial pollutants emission
sources within 500 m assessment area, and flares and LFG generator of SENTX has
been predicted. Dust control measures
for CWHF, PFTF and CBP would be implemented to abate the potential dust impacts during operation. The results indicated that
no adverse air quality impacts on the existing and planned ASRs would be
anticipated.
18.2.3.4
Cumulative odour
impact arising from the operation of proposed EPP, refuse transfer station
(RTS), and sewage pumping station (SPS), ASB Biodiesel (Hong Kong) Limited and
SENTX (aftercare phase) have been evaluated. The results showed that with the incorporation
of the appropriate designs into proposed EPP, RTS and SPS (e.g. maintaining
negative pressure to prevent foul air from escaping the building, covering
treatment units/facilities with potential odour
emission) and adoption of odour removal systems, no
adverse odour impact would be anticipated.
Noise
18.2.3.5
Mitigation
measures including good site practices, adoption of quieter construction
methods, use of quality PME, use of movable noise barriers and full enclosures,
grouping of PMEs and careful schedule of use of PME among nearby construction
work site have been reviewed and are considered feasible and practicable. With the implementation of these mitigation
measures, no adverse construction noise impact arising from the Project would
be anticipated. Construction Noise
Management Plan (CNMP) containing a quantitative construction noise impact
assessment should be prepared and submitted to EPD based on the best available
information before the tender invitation and commencement of the project
construction works, subject to the contract arrangement of the Project and
agreement with EPD, with details on the construction method, plant inventory,
recommended noise mitigation measures and implementation details of the
mitigation measures to ensure compliance with the EIAO-TM criteria
18.2.3.6
A
review on fixed noise impacts associated with the proposed facilities including
EFs, CWHF, PFTF, RTS, CBP and SPS at TKO 132, and Fire Station cum Ambulance
Depot, advance sewage pumping station, EPP, government office/complex, PTIs,
temporary PTFs and green filling station at TKO 137 under the Project was
conducted. With the implementation of
the good design and mitigation measures such as quieter plant, locating the
plant inside acoustic plant room / concrete building / enclosure with openings
directed away from noise sensitive uses, installation of silencer and/or
acoustic louvre, and erecting noise barriers and enclosures, etc., no adverse operational
phase fixed noise from the proposed facilities would be anticipated. There are several existing fixed noise sources
within 300m assessment area of TKO 137 including Tseung Kwan O InnoPark, fixed plants at SENTX, SNG Plant and Desalination
Plant. Except fixed noise from SNG Plant
affecting NSRs at Site PU1&2, no adverse fixed noise impact from these
existing facilities would be anticipated.
With the implementation of proposed mitigation measures such as noise
screening and acoustic mat for noisy equipment of SNG Plant, no adverse fixed
noise impact would be expected. Potential
cumulative fixed noise impact from concurrent existing/planned projects, such
as TKO DP, CD TKO and TKLSE were also considered. No adverse cumulative noise impact from
proposed fixed noise sources and existing fixed noise source within 300 m
assessment area with the implementation of proposed mitigation measures. Fixed Noise Sources Management Plan (FNMP) for
DPs and the fixed noise impact assessment for non-DPs should be prepared to
assess quantitatively the potential fixed noise sources impacts and to assess
the effectiveness and practicality of all proposed noise mitigation
measures. The FNMPs should also contain
fixed noise sources commissioning test plans and monitoring and audit
programme.
18.2.3.7
No
airborne railway noise impact would be anticipated as the planned Tseung Kwan O
Line Southern Extension (TKLSE) would be located underground. Given insufficient design and operational
information of TKLSE at the time of this EIA, ground-borne rail noise impact
assessment was conducted qualitatively, having regard to other existing railway
systems with similarities based on best available information. As TKLSE would be extension of existing TKL,
assessment was conducted with reference to operational information of TKL. The assessment results indicated that no adverse
ground-borne railway noise impact would be anticipated due to TKLSE. Nevertheless,
the design of the TKLSE would be subject to further review by the proponent of
the TKLSE. The proponent of the TKLSE
would conduct an EIA and apply for an EP separately, following the EIAO
mechanism for assessment of the construction and operation of the TKLSE to
ensure no adverse ground-borne noise impact from TKLSE.
18.2.3.8
The predicted road traffic noise levels at
representative NSRs at TKO 132 would comply with the relevant noise criteria
without mitigation measures. For TKO
137, direct noise mitigation at-source measures, low noise road surfacing
(LNRS) has been considered to alleviate the potential road traffic noise
impact. At-receiver noise mitigation
measures such as blank wall / acoustic window are recommended for those planned
NSRs at TKO 137 with noise exceedances under the scenario with the proposed
direct noise mitigation at-source measures. With the proposed noise mitigation measures in
place, no adverse road traffic noise impact would be anticipated at TKO 137.
18.2.3.9
Marine traffic noise impact assessment has been
conducted. The predicted cumulative
marine traffic noise levels at all existing and proposed NSRs would comply with
the noise criteria. No adverse marine
traffic noise impact would be anticipated.
Water
Quality
Land-based Construction
18.2.3.10 The key sources of water quality
impact arising during the land-based construction of the Project include the
construction site runoff, wastewater generated from general construction
activities, accidental chemical spillage, general refuse and sewage from the
workforce. Mitigation measures such as the relevant practices outlined
in ProPECC PN 2/23 ‘Construction Site Drainage’ will be implemented to protect the
water sensitive receivers (WSRs). No adverse water quality impact is expected
from the land-based construction works with proper implementation of the
recommended mitigation measures.
Marine-based Construction
18.2.3.11 Marine-based water quality impact
may arise from the proposed marine construction works at TKO 137 and TKO 132.
Non-dredged DCM treatment method is proposed for construction of the foundation
of the reclamation to minimize the potential water quality impact.
18.2.3.12 Water quality impacts due to marine
construction activities (such as the underwater filling works for reclamation
and dredging works for new berthing facility) have been quantitatively assessed
by mathematical modelling. Suspended solid (SS) and sediment depositions are
identified as the key parameters of concern. Mitigation measures including the
deployment of silt curtains and undertaking the underwater filling works behind
the leading seawall are recommended to mitigate the water quality impact. With
the recommended mitigation measures in place, full compliances with assessment
criteria were predicted at all representative WSRs during the marine
construction works.
Operation Phase
18.2.3.13 Key sources of operational phase
water quality impact would be the sewage and wastewater generated from the
Project development. All sewage and wastewater generated from the Project
development would be either diverted to the existing public sewerage system in
Tseung Kwan O or to the proposed EPP for proper treatment and disposal, which
will prevent waterborne pollution during operation phase.
18.2.3.14 Preventive design measures and an
Emergency Contingency Plan would be implemented to avoid emergency discharge
from the EPP and sewage pumping stations of the Project and to prevent
accidental marine spillage from operation of the TKO 132 development. Storm
pollution control measures and best management practices for storm water
management will also be implemented to minimize the water quality impact due to
non-point source surface runoff. With proper implementation of all the
recommended water quality mitigation measures, no adverse water quality impact would
arise from the Project operation.
Sewerage and Sewage Treatment
Implications
18.2.3.15
As
the spare capacity of the existing sewerage system is unable to cater for the
full intake for TKO 137 development, a new sewerage network and an EPP are
proposed to handle the sewage generated from the new development at TKO
137.
18.2.3.16
For
the development at TKO 132, the existing sewerage system in Tiu Keng Leng has been assessed to have sufficient capacity to cater for the sewage
generated from the new public facilities at TKO 132, and thus a sewage pumping
station with twin rising mains is proposed to convey the sewage from the public
facilities at TKO 132 to the existing sewerage system in Tiu Keng Leng.
18.2.3.17 Based on the sewerage impact assessment,
it can be concluded that the proposed Project is sustainable from sewage
collection, treatment and disposal perspective. No insurmountable sewerage and sewage treatment
implications would be anticipated.
Waste Management Implications
18.2.3.18 During the construction phase, waste
generated from the Project would include C&D materials, chemical waste,
general refuse, sediment and floating refuse.
Reduction measures have been recommended to minimise the amount of C&D materials generated by the Project by
reusing C&D materials before off-site disposal. Provided that the waste is handled,
transported and disposed of according to the recommended mitigation measures, no
adverse waste management implications, including potential hazards, air and
odour emissions, noise, wastewater discharge, ecology and public transport,
associated with handling, storage and disposal of wastes during the
construction phase of the Project would be anticipated.
18.2.3.19 The main waste types to be generated
during the operation phase of the Project will include municipal solid waste,
chemical waste, concrete waste, floating refuse, screenings, grits and sewage
sludge. A new RTS will be included in
preparation for the increased quantity of waste in the district. The proposed waste infrastructure will
provide convenient collection of recyclables from the local community, and to
provide synergy to achieve better operational efficiency and environmental
sustainability. Provided that the waste
is handled, transported and disposed of using according to the recommended
mitigation measures, adverse waste management implications, including potential
hazards, air and odour emissions, noise, wastewater discharge, ecology and
public transport, associated with handling, storage and disposal of wastes
during the operation phase of the Project are not expected.
Land Contamination
18.2.3.20 Based on the findings of site appraisal,
a total of 2 areas with potential land contamination concerns (i.e. an oil
stain at the skips storage and skip lorries parking area (Site S1) and the
future concrete batching plant and transformer room (Site S2)) were identified within the Project area at TKO 137. No potentially contaminating land uses /
activities were identified in TKO 132.
18.2.3.21
As
Site S1 is still in operation and Site S2 is still under construction, and that site clearance at these two sites will not
commence until 2029 based on the tentative construction programme, there
could be changes in the operation or changes in land use within these areas
which may cause further contamination issues. Further site appraisal is
recommended to be carried out for these two sites
when site operation has ceased / after site
handover in order to
assess the latest site conditions / to identify the presence of any potential
land contamination sources, and to address any new contamination issues caused
by any changes in site operation and/or land use within these two sites. Any necessary site investigation (SI) works and remediation action are recommended
to be carried out after the site operation has ceased / decommissioning of the
facility but prior to the commencement of construction works at the concerned
sites / areas. By implementing the
recommended further assessment and remediation works under the Project, the
potentially contaminated site(s) within the Project boundary would be located
and any contaminated soil would be identified and treated.
18.2.3.22 The recommended further assessment
and remediation works, including the submission of Contamination Assessment Plan (s) (CAP(s)), Contamination Assessment Report(s) (CAR(s)) / Remediation Action Plan(s) (RAP(s)) and Remediation Report(s) (RR(s)) would follow relevant Guidance Manual, Guidance Note and Practice
Guide.
Ecology (Terrestrial and Marine)
18.2.3.23
The design of the Project has avoided direct encroachment onto any sites of conservation
importance and ecologically sensitive sites (e.g. Clear Water Bay Country Park,
coral recipient sites at Fat Tong Chau and western Junk Bay). Furthermore, several adjustments and
engineering options have also been made to avoid and further minimise the
significance of direct and indirect ecological impacts arising from the Project, including minimising the extent of
land-based (e.g. site formation, NTHMMs) and marine works (e.g. reclamation) to avoid and/or minimise the loss of habitats
with higher ecological value and the potential of habitat fragmentation.
18.2.3.24 In order to avoid / minimise any unavoidable ecological
impacts rated with an impact severity of low to moderate and above, appropriate
mitigation measures have been recommended, including translocation of affected
coral colonies with high ecological value, in-situ preservation and
transplantation for floral species of conservation importance, incorporation of
ecologically friendly design features into planning design of the development
subject to its feasibility. In addition,
enhancement opportunities including eco-shoreline / ecological enhanced
seawall and greening opportunities to promote the overall habitat quality and
ecological connection have been recommended to enhance the ecological function
of the marine habitats adjacent to the TKO 137 and TKO 132. With the implementation of the recommended
mitigation measures, no unacceptable adverse residual ecological impacts would be anticipated.
Fisheries
18.2.3.25 The proposed works for the Project
would result in permanent loss (about 47 ha) and temporary loss (about 82 ha) of fishing ground and fisheries habitats, respectively. Given that the affected area
constitutes only a small proportion of the fishing ground and fisheries
habitats in Hong Kong, where the fisheries operations primarily consist of
small, flexible sampans, and the low to moderate fisheries production consisting
mainly of non-commercial or low-valued species, the direct impacts on fisheries
are considered to be minor. No direct impacts to the
sites of fisheries importance are anticipated since the works areas will be far
away from them. Changes in water quality associated with construction
activities are not expected to result in unacceptable impacts on fisheries
resources and habitats. Potential impacts of elevated level of underwater sound
as a result of construction activities are also not
expected to be unacceptable.
18.2.3.26 During
the operational phase, there would be around 47
ha loss of fishing ground and fisheries habitats due to reclamation and the
marine viaduct piles. However, the loss only constitutes an insignificant
proportion of fishing ground and fisheries habitats in Hong Kong, and the direct
impacts to capture fisheries due to loss of fishing ground and disruption of
fisheries operation are expected to be minor. Indirect impacts related to
changes in water quality from sewage / wastewater generation, effluent
discharge, surface runoff, accidental marine spillage from barges, and
maintenance sediment removal are expected to be of minor significance. The
Project would not significantly alter the local hydrodynamics regime and hence
the impact of change in hydrodynamics on fisheries is considered minor.
Potential impacts of underwater sound due to vessel operation are not expected
to be unacceptable.
18.2.3.27 With
the adoption of non-dredged reclamation method such as DCM as far as
practicable, as well as the implementation of adequate water quality mitigation
measures such as installation of silt curtains, good site practices and best
management practices, alongside ecological enhancement measures such as eco-shoreline / ecological enhanced seawall,
no adverse fisheries impacts are
expected.
Landscape and Visual
18.2.3.28 A broad-brush tree survey was
carried out to identify the existing trees located within the Project boundary,
which approximate 5,497 trees has been surveyed. None of these are Registered Old and Valuable
Trees (OVTs), rare or endangered tree species and no trees with DBH over 1m
which are considered as Tree of Particular Interest were identified. Within the proposed works area, approximately
1,250 existing trees would be directly affected by the proposed works will be
proposed to be removed or transplanted as far as practicable. Compensatory planting would be implemented
following the prevailing mechanism (e.g. DEVB TC(W) No. 4/2020), with due
regard to the planting guidelines promulgated by the Greening, Landscape and
Tree Management Section of DEVB and other relevant greenery and tree planting
guidelines. No off-site compensatory tree planting is proposed.
18.2.3.29 The Project will inevitably result
in some landscape and visual impacts during construction and operational
phases.
18.2.3.30
Among the identified landscape resources (LRs),
vegetation within TKO 137 (LR1), hillside vegetation at Devil’s Peak (LR2),
shrubland at Tit Cham Chau and Fat Tong Chau (LR3), coastal water (LR6), rocky
shore along western coastline of Junk Bay (LR9), hillside vegetation at Chiu
Keng Wan Shan (LR11) and sandy shore along western coastline of Junk Bay (LR13)
would have moderate impact significance.
With appropriate mitigation measures, it is considered that the residual
impacts on most of these LRs would be reduced to moderate to sight in Day 1,
and slight to negligible in Year 10 of operation. However, the loss of water
body of coastal water (LR6) is irreversible and the
residual impacts would maintain as moderate in Year 10 of the operation.
Meanwhile, vegetation along drainage channel (LR4), roadside planting (LR8) and
orchard/ vegetation near rural settlement (LR12) would have slight impact
significance due to the proposed development.
Considered that impacts caused by the proposed development to these LRs
would be considered as slight, hence it is assumed that residual impacts on
these LRs would be slight in Day 1 and reduced to negligible in Year 10 of
operation after the implementation of mitigation measures.
18.2.3.31
For the landscape character area (LCA), the most
permanent works such as reclamation and building of the Public Facilities and
roadworks would be located within Fat Tong O Reclamation (LCA1), Fat Tong Chau
and Tin Ha Au upland and hillside landscape (LCA2), Chiu Keng Wan upland and
hillside landscape (LCA3), water body of Tathong
Channel and Joss House Bay (LCA4) and Junk Bay (LCA5). Hence, it is anticipated
that the impact significance before mitigation would be moderate. With the
implementation of mitigation measures, the residual impact of most of these
LCAs would be reduced from moderate to slight in Day 1 and negligible in Year
10 of operational phase. However, the
loss of water body of Tathong Channel and Joss House
Bay (LCA4) and Junk Bay (LCA5) are irreversible and
the residual impacts would maintain as moderate in Year 10 of the operation.
Some proposed works such as constructing EPP within Fat Tong O industrial urban
landscape (LCA8) and provision of marine viaduct connecting to the existing TKO
transportation corridor (LCA9) would slightly alter the existing landscape
character. It is assumed that there would be slight impact significance to
these LCAs. With the implementation of mitigation measures, the residual impact
would be slight in Day 1 and reduced to negligible in Year 10 of operational
phase. The present barren reclamation
landscape character in Fat Tong O (LCA1) would be substantially changed and
replaced by a new residential urban landscape character of TKO 137, while a
portion of western coastline of Junk Bay bay
landscape character (LCA5) would be altered to TKO transportation corridor
landscape character (LCA9) and a new reclamation landscape character of TKO 132
to accommodate Public Facilities away from existing and planned residential
developments. The resultant new landscape character would provide a community
incorporating environmental and biodiversity initiatives which enhancing the
overall quality of life for residents.
18.2.3.32 In terms of the visual impact,
considered that the proposed development of TKO 132 and TKO 137 are relatively
extensive in terms of development scale. It is anticipated that the existing visual
context of the selected VPs would be affected inevitably in various level.
18.2.3.33
For VPs that viewing to TKO 137, the impact significance would be substantial to VP8
(view from Tin Ha Shan) and VP10 (view from traveller
along the ferry route of Tathong Channel) due to the close proximity to the proposed development while
alternating the existing visual context in a substantial degree. The impact significance would be moderate to
slight to VP1, VP3 and VP9 due to far viewing distance and slight degree of
change in the existing visual context and character. With implementation of the
mitigation measures, the residual impact of VP1, VP3 and VP9 would be reduced
from sight to moderate in Day 1 and negligible to slight in Year 10 of
operational phase, while VP8 and VP10 would be substantial in Day 1 and still
be moderate residual impact in Year 10 of operational phase.
18.2.3.34
For VPs that viewing proposed development of TKO
132, the impact significance would generally be slight to moderate for VP4,
VP5, VP6 and VP12 due to its relatively small in scale development and low in
building profile. Existing visual context such as ridgeline of Devil hill or
Chiu Keng Wan Shan could still be maintained.
Hence, the residual impact would reduce from slight in Day 1 to
negligible in Year 10 of operational phase after the implementation of mitigation
measures.
18.2.3.35
For VPs that viewing both the proposed
development of TKO 132 and TKO 137, the impact significance would be ranging
from moderate to substantial to VP2, VP7 and VP11 due to its extensive
development scale and visual blockage to existing natural elements such as
foothill of Chiu Keng Wan Shan and ridgeline of Tin Ha Shan. Since the nature
of development is similar to existing urbanised area of Tiu Keng Leng, Tseung Kwan O and LOHAS
Park, the proposed developments of both TKO 132 and TKO 137 would consider as
an extension of existing urbanised area. With
implementation of the mitigation measures, it is anticipated that the residual
impact of VP2 and VP11 would be moderate in Day 1 and reduced to slight in Year
10 of operational phase, while VP7 (View from Lookout of the Devil’s Peak)
would be substantial in Day 1 and still be moderate residual impact in Year 10
of operational phase.
18.2.3.36
With the aims to improve the overall quality of
development within the Project, mitigation against adverse impacts would be
adopted as far as practicable. Number of
key planning, urban design and landscape design framework would be developed
and proposed in RODP, Master Urban Design Plan and Landscape Master plan. With this guiding principle set out in early
stage, these mitigation measures during construction stage could optimise their effect by avoidance of significant change in
the existing landscape and visual context, creating visual outlook and
landscape characters of the proposed development, ensuring ample green space
and initiative are considered during the design stage and together with the
preservation, protection and compensatory planting of trees / vegetation.
18.2.3.37
Considering the scale and nature of the Project,
it would inevitably result in certain levels of residual landscape and visual
impacts in relation to the loss of water body, loss of natural shorelines and
the views from hilltop and from sea level. Nevertheless, the residual landscape
impacts are localized and limited to the reclamation extent only without
affecting existing community, while the residual visual impacts are confined
within the visual envelope either involving few numbers of public viewers along
hiking trail and ferry route, or relatively large numbers of public viewers
along promenade but viewing at long distance. With the implementation of the
proposed landscape and visual mitigation measures, the overall landscape
residual impacts would be from negligible to moderate in Day 1 and Year 10 of
operational phase, and the overall visual residual impacts would be from slight
to substantial in Day 1 and from negligible to moderate in Year 10 of
operational phase. With full implementation of the recommended mitigation
measures, unacceptable adverse residual landscape and visual impacts are not
expected.
Cultural Heritage
18.2.3.38
No declared monument, proposed
monument, graded historic building or government historic sites and site of
archaeological interest (SAI) were identified within the Project boundary of TKO 137
and TKO 132. Direct impact
on built heritage would not be anticipated.
18.2.3.39
Two graded historic
buildings and four other identified items
are located within the 300 m assessment area but outside of the Project boundary
of TKO 132. No adverse direct and
indirect impact would be anticipated for the built heritage and other
identified items in concern. Therefore,
no mitigation measure would be required.
18.2.3.40
One declared monument and three SAIs are located within the 300 m assessment area
but outside of the Project boundary of TKO 137. However, Fat Tau Chau House Ruin SAI (SAI185) is
located near the Project boundary of TKO 137.
While no direct impact is anticipated to the site, adverse indirect impact of ground-borne vibration,
tilting and ground settlement arising from
the construction activities of the Project is anticipated on this archaeological heritage.
18.2.3.41
To mitigate such adverse indirect impact on Fat Tau Chau House
Ruin SAI (SAI185), condition and structural surveys, as well as a baseline
vibration review are
recommended. The condition and
structural surveys should be conducted before and after all construction works
to inspect the physical condition and structural integrity of the structure. Based
on the pre-construction condition and structural survey results and
construction details, the baseline vibration review before the construction
phase shall evaluate if monitoring of ground-borne vibration, tilting and ground
settlement is required during the construction phase. The baseline vibration
review should be submitted to AMO for comment and agreement before
implementation. If affirmative, monitoring of ground-borne vibration, tilting
and ground settlement should be conducted during the construction phase. Any vibration and building movement induced
from the construction works should be strictly monitored to ensure no
disturbance and physical damage made to the heritage sites during
the course of works.
18.2.3.42 Additionally, a buffer zone is recommended for Fat
Tau Chau House Ruin SAI (SAI185) during the construction phase to ensure no
construction workers or equipment will be in contact with the archaeological
heritage directly. Also, Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation
shall be followed. Dust suppression measures and good site
practice should be observed by the project proponent during the construction
phase in order to avoid dust accumulation on Fat Tau
Chau House Ruin SAI (SAI185).
18.2.3.43 In
terms of archaeology, for areas of Fat Tau Chau within the Project boundary of
TKO 137, this AIA reviewed the area to have low archaeological potential (Sections 12.6.3.6 to 12.6.3.9 refer) based on desktop
review (Sections 12.3.1.6 to 12.3.1.9 refer) while site visits
dated 25th January and 24th July 2024 were hindered by lack of safe access and
thick vegetation coverage over the steep slopes. While it is
unlikely to have any prominent and noticeable remains related to the custom
station at grade located within the Project boundary of TKO 137, it is not
possible to confirm whether archaeological remains or features of the Fat Tau
Chau Customs Station and other facilities below ground would exist within the
Project boundary of TKO 137.
18.2.3.44
To ensure that no archaeological resources related to the Customs Station on Fat Tau Chau would be affected by
the Project, an Archaeological Impact Assessment should be undertaken during the detailed design phase when
the details of the proposed works on Fat Tau Chau are available. This Archaeological Impact Assessment at the detailed design phase shall assess the archaeological
potential concerning the existence of remains or features in relation to the Customs Stations or other facilities
within the Project boundary of TKO 137 on Fat Tau Chau, particularly in areas that would be affected by the proposed works. Based on the details and extent of proposed works
to be carried out on Fat Tau Chau, the Archaeological Impact Assessment at the detailed design phase would propose appropriate
measures, if any impact on archaeological heritage is identified, for
consideration and agreement by AMO. The Archaeological Impact Assessment at the detailed design phase shall be conducted by an
archaeologist. It shall incorporate
desktop information, site inspection results and recommendation of appropriate mitigation measures, namely change of work design, preservation of archaeological heritage in-situ,
preservation by relocation, archaeological survey cum excavation or rescue
excavation, archaeological watching brief or preservation by record subject to the
level of potential impacts to be confirmed in the Archaeological Impact
Assessment at detailed design phase upon availability of the details and extent
of the proposed works to be carried out on Fat Tau Chau, as necessary for consideration and agreement by AMO.
This Archaeological Impact Assessment at the detailed design phase should be conducted by the
project proponent. In the light of the above considerations, no adverse impact would be anticipated with mitigation measures agreed
by AMO and implemented to the satisfaction of AMO to ensure preservation of the
archaeological heritage within the Project boundary of TKO 137 on Fat Tau Chau.
18.2.3.45 Furthermore, if
antiquities or supposed antiquities under the Antiquities and Monuments
Ordinance (Cap. 53) are discovered
during the construction works within the Project
boundary of TKO 137 and TKO 132, the project proponent is required to inform
AMO immediately for discussion of appropriate mitigation measures to be agreed
by AMO before implementation by the project proponent to the satisfaction of
AMO.
18.2.3.46 Based
on the Marine Archaeological Investigation (MAI), no impact on marine
archaeology from the Project is expected. Following
the geophysical and diver surveys, adjustments to the Project boundary have
resulted in minor data gaps and one uninvestigated anomaly. Given that the areas with data gaps and the
uninvestigated anomaly are located at least approximately 225 m outside the
marine works boundary of the Project, no marine archaeological impact is
anticipated. Therefore, no mitigation
measures are considered necessary.
Nevertheless, as a precautionary measure, it is recommended to designate
these areas with data gaps and the uninvestigated anomaly as AEZs during the
marine works of the Project to ensure no impact on the seabed from anchoring of
work vessels during the marine works of the Project in these locations.
Hazard to Life
18.2.3.47 Hazard
assessments were conducted to assess the risks associated with the planned
desalination plant, existing SNG production plant, proposed EPP, existing explosives off-loading pier and proposed green
fuel station (GFS) during both construction and operational phases of the
Project. The results showed that both
the individual risks and societal risks, taking into account
the population induced by the Project, would be in compliance with the risk
criteria stipulated. Risk mitigation measures are therefore not
required.
18.2.3.48 Regarding the transport of explosives
during construction phase of the Project, buffer distances (i.e. 90 m for
indoor population and 35 m for outdoor population) from the delivery route
should be maintained during the delivery of explosives.
Landfill Gas Hazard
18.2.3.49 Landfill gas hazard assessment for
TKO 132 is not required as the development resides beyond 250 m Consultation
Zone of any landfill. The northeastern
quadrant of TKO 137 lies within the 250 m Consultation Zone for the SENT and
SENTX, therefore landfill gas hazard assessment has been conducted for those
development areas of TKO 137 situated within the 250 m Consultation Zone.
18.2.3.50 The overall risk for the
construction phase for the Development ranges from Low to Medium. Safety requirements stated in Chapter 8 of the
Landfill Gas Hazard Assessment Guidance Note are recommended to be implemented
properly during construction phase.
18.2.3.52
The
overall risk levels for the operational phase for Government, Institution or
Community, Public Housing Sites, Education and Other Specified Uses ranges such
as the EPP from Low to High. “Passive”
or “Active” control measures should be considered for development areas categorised
as “Medium” or “High” Risk respectively.
18.2.3.53 Detailed Landfill Gas Hazard
Assessment, shall be conducted in accordance with the Landfill Gas Hazard
Assessment Guidance Note, during the detailed design stage of the Development
with appropriate control measures recommended based on the type of
buildings/structures proposed, however potential hazard(s) posed by landfill
gas are considered to be surmountable and numerous feasible engineering options
exists to mitigate any unacceptable risk identified to acceptable levels.
18.2.3.54 Provided that the construction and
operational phase protection controls are appropriately designed and properly
implemented, safety will be safeguarded and risk associated with landfill gas
migration and potential hazard will be adequately controlled.
Electric and Magnetic Fields
18.2.3.55 Electric and Magnetic Field impact
assessment has been conducted. The
proposed EFs and the proposed ESSs are of the similar nature and design of
existing ESS. With reference to the measurement
results in previous separate approved EIA, approved direct application of EPs
and literature which was measured with negligible electric and magnetic field
impact compared to the ICNIRP limits.
Therefore, no adverse electric and magnetic field impact would be
anticipated from the proposed ESSs and the proposed EFs.
18.3.1.1
The
Project has avoided encroachment on the existing On Luen Village at Devil’s
Peak.
18.4.1.1
The
Project has avoided encroachment into existing Clear Water Bay Country Park and
coral recipient sites at Devil’s Peak and Junk Bay. The reclamation extent of TKO 132 has been
optimised to minimise impact to the natural shoreline. In terms of cultural heritage, no Declared
Monuments and Graded Historic Buildings would be located within the Project
boundary, and the Declared Monuments and Graded Historic Buildings in the
vicinity of the Project would be preserved.
18.5
Overall Conclusion
18.5.1.1
The
findings of this EIA have provided information on the nature and extent of
environmental impacts arising from the construction and operation of the
Project. The EIA has, where appropriate,
identified mitigation measures to ensure compliance with environmental
legislation and standards.
18.5.1.2
Overall, the EIA Report has predicted that the
Project would be environmentally acceptable with the implementation of the
proposed mitigation measures for construction and operation phases. An environmental monitoring and audit
programme has been recommended to ensure the effectiveness of recommended
mitigation measures.