TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.2 Environmental Impact Assessment
Study
1.3 Purpose of this Executive Summary
2.1 Appreciation of Existing
Environment
2.3 Development Opportunities for
Project Development
2.4 Development Constraints for
Project Development
2.5 General Description of the
Project
2.6 Recommended Outline Development
Plan (RODP)
2.9 Development Programme for the
Project
3. Key Findings of the
Environmental Impact Assessment
3.5 Sewerage and Sewage Treatment
Implications
3.6 Waste Management Implications
3.8 Ecological Impact (Terrestrial and
Marine)
3.10 Landscape and Visual Impacts
3.11 Impact on Cultural Heritage
3.14 Impact from Electric and Magnetic Fields
4. Environmental
Monitoring and Audit
5. Summary of
Environmental Outcomes
List of Tables
Table 2.1
Needs for Public Facilities in PODP Stage
Table 2.2
Planning Requirements for Public Facilities in PODP Stage
Table
2.3 Land Use Budget of the RODP for
Tseung Kwan O Area 137
Table 2.4
Land Use Budget of the RODP for the land to be created off Tseung Kwan O
Area 132
Table 2.5
Schedule 2 Designated Projects in the Project
Table 5.1
Summary of Key Environmental Problems Avoided and Sensitive Areas
Protected
Table 6.1
Summary of Environmental Impacts
List of Figures
Project Location Plan |
|
RODP for Tseung Kwan O Area 137 |
|
RODP for the land to be created off Tseung Kwan O Area 132 |
|
Location of Designated Projects (Sheet 1 of 2) |
|
Location of Designated Projects (Sheet 2 of 2) |
Table 2.1 Needs for Public Facilities in PODP Stage
Public Facility |
Need of the facilities/ site selection consideration |
Marine Frontage Requirement |
PFTF |
Public fill generated in the territory east is currently received and stockpiled at the TKO 137 temporary fill bank pending transfer to appropriate projects for reuse. With the plan to develop TKO 137, and while the upcoming reclamation projects in Hong Kong would reduce significantly the need for stockpiling public fill, there is still a need to retain a smaller-scale facility to receive and transfer public fill generated in the territory east (including TKO), at a location with marine frontage.
|
Marine frontage is required for transferring public fill received to appropriate projects through marine transport.
|
CBP |
The temporary CBP at TKO 137 is planned to be decommissioned by 2029. A permanent site for re-provisioning the CBP in the vicinity is required to serve construction sites in East Kowloon and New Territories East (including TKO), as freshly mixed concrete must be delivered within a reasonably short time to construction sites to maintain the quality of concrete.
|
To facilitate the operation of the CBP, a waterfront site to allow transportation of raw materials by sea for concrete production could avoid increasing loading on road traffic.
|
EFs, comprising power receiving and conversion facilities, are important strategic infrastructure for enhancing Hong Kong’s capability to import zero-carbon energy through regional cooperation and meeting the decarbonisation target of reducing Hong Kong’s carbon emissions by 50% before 2035 as compared to the 2005 level, with a view to achieving carbon neutrality before 2050.
TKO 132 is considered as the optimal location as it is situated near the potential connection points at TKO and Island East of the two power companies’ existing power grids, and their power systems can be interconnected through submarine cables with a shorter distance.
|
Marine frontage is necessary for the landing of submarine cables.
|
|
CWHF |
There is a need to set up a CWHF to receive, handle and bulk transfer construction waste primarily generated from the territory east (including TKO) to the other waste handling facilities (e.g. landfill) upon the closure of SENTX prior to population intake at TKO 137.
|
Bulk transfer of mixed construction waste to other waste handling facilities would require marine frontage.
|
RTS |
There is currently no dedicated RTS in the territory east area (including TKO). Temporary arrangement is put in place to transfer municipal solid waste (MSW) generated in this area to RTSs in Island East, West Kowloon and Shatin for handling. As these three RTSs have reached their capacity limits, there is a need to set up a RTS for serving existing and future developments in the territory east area (including TKO).
|
Marine frontage is necessary as MSW would be compacted and containerised in purposely built containers for onward shipment to waste management facilities via marine traffic.
|
MRCP |
As the Cha Kwo Ling site is to be developed into part of a waterfront promenade, the MRCP thereat is proposed to be reprovisioned at a location in the territory east to serve the eastern waters. Proximity to the RTS also allows operational synergy.
|
Marine frontage is necessary for unloading collected refuse from the vessels.
|
Infrastructure Constraints
Limited Development Area in TKO 137
Tathong Channel Traffic Separation Scheme (Tathong Channel TSS)
Avoidance and Minimisation of Industrial and Residential Interface Problems
Consideration of Permitted Burial Ground during planning
Environmental Constraints
Existing Ecological, Natural and Landscape Features
Declared Monument/ Site of Archaeological Interest
Infrastructure Constraints
Existing Government Land Licences
Junk Bay Chinese Permanent Cemetery (JBCPC)
Junk Bay Dangerous Goods Anchorage (JBDGA)
Diagram 2.1 – Location of JBDGA[4]
Requirements for Public Facilities
Table 2.2 Planning Requirements for Public Facilities in PODP Stage
Public Facilities |
Required Footprint |
Maximum Building Height |
Minimum Marine Frontage Required |
EFs |
5.9 ha |
60 m |
200 m for sloping seawall for cable landing |
RTS |
3.0 ha
|
40 m (50 m for on-shore crane) |
170 m |
CWHF |
4.5 ha |
20 m |
180 m |
PFTF |
4.0 ha |
25 m |
230 m |
CBP |
0.6 ha |
28 m |
80 m |
MRCP |
0.18 ha |
14 m |
30 m |
Environmental Constraints
Existing Ecological, Natural and Landscape Features
Graded Historic Buildings
· Residential sites for high density public and private residential developments. About 50,000 new flats will be provided to accommodate about 135,000 persons upon full development.
· A wide variety of G/IC facilities such as schools, police station, fire station, Government Complex etc. serving the needs of the local residents and/or a wider district, region or the territory.
· A variety of infrastructural facilities such as an Effluent Polishing Plant (EPP), a fresh water service reservoir (FWSR), a salt water service reservoir (SWSR), electricity substations (ESSs), Public Transport Interchanges (PTIs) and a SPS serving the needs of the local residents and/or a wider district, region or the territory.
· Open space including outdoor open-air public space for active and/or passive recreational uses serving the needs of both the local residents, workers, as well as the general public.
· Amenity strips enhancing the amenity and serving as visual buffers between existing villages and new developments.
· Eight Local Distributor Roads (Dual 2-lane / Single 2-lane Standard)
· A single-2-lane carriageway road connecting carriageway bridges for motor vehicles in the form of marine viaduct to/from TKO 132
Table 2.3 Land Use Budget of the RODP for Tseung Kwan O Area 137
Approx. Area (ha) (% of total) |
|
Residential -
Public - Private |
51.9 (50.8%) 25.9 26.0 |
Government, Institution and Community Facilities - Primary Schools - Secondary Schools - Sports Centre and Government Reserve - Divisional Police Station - Sub-divisional Fire Station cum Ambulance Depot - Government Complex (includes Swimming Pool Complex, Sports Centre, Public Market, Community Hall, Health Centre, Recycling Store, Refuse Collection Point) |
7.3 (7.2%) 2.0 1.6 0.8 0.4 0.5 2.0
|
Open Space |
18.8 (18.4%) |
Other Specified Uses – - Effluent Polishing Plant - Green Fuel Station - Electricity Substation - Fresh Water Service Reservoir / Salt Water Service Reservoir
|
6.9 (6.8%) 4.5 0.4 1.0 1.0
|
Roads |
17.2 (16.9%) |
TOTAL (about) |
102.2 (round to 103) (100%) |
Remarks: The above Land Use Budget is based on the RODP version dated 2024.07.10. Due to rounding, the figures presented may not add up precisely to the totals provided and percentages may not precisely reflect the absolute figures.
Table 2.4 Land Use Budget of the RODP for the land to be created off Tseung Kwan O Area 132
Land Use |
Approx. Area (ha) (% of total) |
(A) EFs |
5.6 (28.3%) |
(B) RTS |
3.0 (15.3%) |
(C) CWHF |
4.5 (22.7%) |
(D) PFTF |
4.0 (20.2%) |
(E) CBP |
0.6 (3.0%) |
(F) Others* |
2.0 (10.1%) |
Total (about) |
19.8 (round to 20) (100%) |
· 1: An urban development or redevelopment project covering an area of more than 50 ha.
Table 2.5 Schedule 2 Designated Projects in the Project
Ref. No. |
Schedule 2 Designated Project |
Work Component /Reference in RODP |
|
DP1 |
A.8 |
A carriageway bridge for motor vehicles, or a railway bridge, the
length between abutments for which is more than 100 m, with bridge piers over
the sea supporting the bridge |
A carriageway bridge in form of viaduct structure for motor vehicles
with a minimum length of about 700 m between abutments and supported by piers
over the sea, will be constructed near TKO-LTT to provide a direct and
convenient connection to the proposed facilities at TKO 132. |
DP2 |
C.1 |
Reclamation works (including associated dredging works) more than 5 ha
in size |
Around 20 ha of land will be formed by reclamation at TKO 137. |
C.2 |
Reclamation works (including associated dredging works) that are of
more than 1 ha in size, and a boundary of which is (c) less than 100 m from
the nearest boundary of an existing residential area |
Project boundary of the reclamation works (around 19 ha) at TKO 132 is
around 30 m from the nearest boundary of On Luen Village (location of
existing government land licences). |
|
DP3 |
F.1 |
Sewage treatment works with an installed capacity of more than 15,000
m3 per day |
Construction and operation of an EPP with an installed capacity of
approx. 54,000 m3 per day at TKO 137. The EPP is around 100 m from the planned
residential area and around 60 m from the planned educational institution at
TKO 137. |
F.2 |
Sewage treatment works (a) with an installed capacity of more than
5,000 m3 per day; and (b) a boundary of which is less than 200m
from the nearest boundary of an existing or planned (i) residential area and
(iii) educational institution |
||
DP4 |
G.2 |
A refuse transfer station |
Construction and operation of a RTS at formed land off TKO 132 |
DP5 |
G.5 |
A facility for the treatment of construction waste (a) with a designed
capacity of more than 500 tonnes per day; and (b) a boundary of which is less
than 200 m from the nearest boundary of an existing or planned (i)
residential area |
Construction and operation of a Construction Waste Handling Facility
with handling capacity of around 3,000 tonnes per day at formed land off TKO
132. |
DP6 |
H.1 |
A 400kV electricity substation and transmission line |
Construction and operation of Electricity Facilities (EFs) at formed
land off TKO 132. EFs are planned to
house equipment up to 400kV. |
Note:
1 Application of Environmental Permit (EP) will be supported by this EIA Study.
2 Application of EP will be supported by a separate Schedule 2 EIA Study or separate Direct Application of EP to be conducted by the respective project proponent.
3 There is no design information for EFs provided from the operator at the time of assessment. The assumption of a 400 kV electricity substation, a Schedule 2 DP under EIAO, is considered in this EIA study.
Table 2.6 Summary of Non-Designated Projects
Non-Designated Project |
Sub-Element |
TKO 132 |
|
Other Specified Uses (OU) |
Public Fill Transfer Facility (OU(PFTF)) |
Concrete Batching Plant (OU(CBP)) |
|
Sewage Pumping Station (OU(SPS)) |
|
Amenity (A) |
Roadside amenity |
Roads |
Local roads |
TKO 137 |
|
Residential Development |
Public Housing Site (RSc) |
Private Housing - Zone 1 (R1) |
|
Private Housing - Zone 2 (R2) |
|
Public Transport Interchange |
|
Social Welfare Facilities |
|
Government, Institutional or Community (G/IC) |
Divisional Police Station |
Sub-divisional Fire Station cum Ambulance Depot |
|
Sports centre and Government Reserve |
|
Government Complex (includes Swimming Pool Complex, Sports Centre, Public Market, Community Hall, Health Centre, Recycling Store, Refuse Collection Point) |
|
Education (E) |
Schools |
Open Space (O) |
Recreational Facilities and Landscaping |
Other Specified Uses (OU) |
Electrical Substation (OU(ESS)) |
Green Fuel Station (OU(GFS)) |
|
Salt Water Service Reservoir (OU(SWSR)) |
|
Fresh Water Service Reservoir (OU(FWSR)) |
|
Roads |
Local roads |
(a) Should the change(s) involve a DP item under Schedule 2 of the EIAO, the requirements under the EIAO will be complied with; and
(b) Should the change(s) not involve any DP items under Schedule 2 of the EIAO, prevailing planning mechanisms and standards will be followed and relevant EIA findings will be conformed to.
Direct Benefits
Environmental Benefit and Initiatives
2.8.1.4 Reduce heavy vehicles at Wan Po Road –Currently, vast majority of the existing traffic on Wan Po Road south of LOHAS Park is generated by TKOFB. The heavy vehicles, such as diesel fuel dump trucks, are driving through the existing road network of TKO New Town to TKOFB which could cause disturbance to local residents. With TKOFB converting into a housing development, the traffic on Wan Po Road is expected to shift predominantly to electric and petroleum vehicles, which emit fewer pollutants. By locating the PFTF at TKO 132, those heavy vehicles generated could be diverted away from TKO New Town and access to Kowloon directly via Tseung Lam Highway. This would minimise any possible nuisance to local residents.
· Comprehensive pedestrian network – Comprehensive pedestrian network of TKO 137 connects residential and employment nodes to provide continuous walkways for pedestrians. It could promote walking from homes to workplaces, retail and services for various purposes.
· Open space network / green linkages – A series of open space corridors branching off the main comprehensive pedestrian network, including the open spaces along drainage channel and linear parks along major road. They shall provide additional pedestrian connections to the surrounding residential communities and employment areas, and further to the green and natural areas.
· Robust cycling network – TKO 137 provides a robust cycling network which link effectively to the existing and planned cycling tracks within and outside TKO 137. The proposed cycling network would connect to the existing tracks from Wan Po Road to create a continuous cycling environment that extends to other destinations beyond the TKO 137. Routes within TKO 137 would be provided parallel to the major roadways to serve commuting needs, as well as to provide some other routes within the proposed open space areas for leisure.
Promoting Biodiversity
Initial Phase Development
· Phase 1 Reclamation including associate seawall works, site formation, box culvert and seawall outfall works for the middle portion along the southwest shoreline and the existing barging basin at the north of TKO 137.
· Site development works for two “Public Housing” (“PU”) sites at north of the Project area, including associated local roads and the interchange/junction works connecting with Wan Po Road, pedestrian connectivity, drainage, waterworks, sewerage (including construction of advance SPS), utilities, electrical and mechanical, M, paving, road marking and street furniture works to support the first population intake.
· Reclamation, seawall construction, slope-cutting, site formation, box culvert(s) and seawall outfall(s) to form about 20 ha for the proposed development.
· Construct of marine viaducts and road network to connect the land to be created off TKO 132 to existing Tseung Lam Highway.
· Other engineering infrastructure works including roads, interchange/junction, pedestrian connectivity, drainage, sewerage including construction of SPS, waterworks, landscape to support the development
Main Phase Development
· Phase 2 Reclamation including associated seawall works, site formation, box culvert(s) and seawall outfall(s) for the southern portion along the southwest shoreline.
· Site development works for four “Public Housing” (“RSc”) sites at east of the Project area.
· Site development works for one ‘Private Housing” (“R1”) site at northwest of the Project area.
· Site development works for “Government, Institution or Community” (“G”) sties.
· Site development works for “Education” (“E”) sites.
· Site development works for “Other Specified Uses” (“OU”) sites for key infrastructures, including EPP, FWSR and SWSR.
· Associated local roads, interchange/junction, pedestrian connectivity, drainage, waterworks, sewerage, UU, E&M, paving, road marking and street furniture works.
Remaining Phase Development
2.9.1.9 Remaining Phase Development is the last phase of the development for TKO 137, mainly including development works at the land area that was occupied by HyD/RDO for TKLSE construction at initial phase (subject to HyD/RDO’s later formulation of the railway construction works), as well as any remaining infrastructure and interfacing works from the last development phase. The development works in this phase is to support the targeted population intake in Year 2038 and the targeted mass population intake in Year 2041 respectively at TKO 137.
2.9.1.10 The major development works in this development phase will include:
· Site development works for two ‘Private Housing” (“R1”) sites and two ‘Private Housing” (“R2”) sites at west of the Project area.
· Associated local roads, interchange/junction, pedestrian connectivity, drainage, waterworks, sewerage, UU, E&M, paving, road marking and street furniture.
· Interfacing works from the last development phase.
· Air Quality Impact
· Noise Impact
· Water Quality Impact
· Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Implications
· Waste Management Implications
· Land Contamination
· Ecological Impact
· Fisheries Impact
· Landscape and Visual Impact
· Cultural Heritage Impact
· Hazard to Life
· Landfill Gas Hazard
· Electric and Magnetic Fields
Construction Phase
Operation Phase
Construction Phase
Operational phase
Construction Phase
Operation Phase
Construction Phase
Operation phase
Table 5.1 Summary of Key Environmental Problems Avoided and Sensitive Areas Protected
Design Approaches |
Environmental Problems Avoided and Environmental Options |
Avoidance of encroachment into CWBCP |
· The proposed natural terrain mitigation works (i.e. flexible barrier) has been re-located to be within the EPP site to avoid any works encroaching into CWBCP |
Preservation of natural shoreline |
· Reclamation extent of TKO 132 has been optimised to minimise the impact to the natural shoreline. Approximately 1 km of natural shoreline can be maintained |
Minimise direct impact to hard and black corals colonies and coral recipient site at western Junk Bay |
· Reclamation extent of TKO 132 has been optimised to avoid encroachment into the coral recipient sites at Junk Bay and minimise direct impact to hard and black corals colonies and coral recipient site at western Junk Bay |
Minimise direct impact to subtidal habitats and associated coral colonies in Western Junk Bay |
· Reclamation extent of TKO 132 has been optimised to minimise direct impact to subtidal habitats and associated coral colonies in Western Junk Bay |
Avoidance of encroachment on the existing government land licences at On Luen Village |
· Site formation at TKO 132 has been designed to avoid encroachment into the existing government land licences at On Luen Village. |
Avoidance of direct impacts on natural water course |
· Pier locations of the marine viaduct has been designed to avoid direct impact on the natural watercourse near TKO 132. |
Minimise impact to the terrestrial ecology at Devil’s Peak |
· The natural terrain mitigation works have been optimised to ensure that the works area is limited to the toe of Devil’s Peak as far as possible in order to minimise the terrestrial ecology impact. |
Minimise potential odour impact |
· The EPP emission points are designed to be located away from the sensitive receivers to minimise the potential odour impact |
Providing sustainable transport infrastructure to promote low-carbon living |
· Pedestrian-friendly environment and robust cycling network are proposed to promote walkability and cycling for low-carbon living |
Appropriate Planning of Building Configuration and Setback, and application of acoustic windows and/or enhanced acoustic balcony |
· 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.
|
Create buffer distance between TKOIP and sensitive receivers/uses in TKO 137 |
· To minimise the impact from the TKOIP to the sensitive receivers/uses in TKO 137, G/IC and open spaces have been positioned between TKOIP and residential sites to sufficient buffer distance |
Adoption of Non-dredged Reclamation |
· Non-dredged reclamation with in-situ ground treatment methods (including marine-based deep cement mixing and land-based jet grouting) would be adopted to minimise the associated water quality impacts, the waste management implications from sediment disposal and the secondary environmental impacts from induced marine traffic.
|
Adoption of Environmentally Friendly Construction Method |
· 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.
|
Table 6.1 Summary of Environmental Impacts
Impact Prediction Results (Without Mitigation) |
Key Relevant Standards/Criteria |
Extents of Exceedance Predicted (Without Mitigation) |
Impact Avoidance Measures / Mitigation Measures |
Residual Impacts (After Implementation of Mitigation Measures) |
|
Air Quality Impact |
|||||
Construction Impact |
|||||
· Representative existing residential, commercial developments and government uses within 500 m from the boundary of the Project site |
The potential sources of air quality impact associated with the construction works would include site formation, excavation, backfilling, stockpiling, material handling, spoil removal, vehicle movement and wind erosion, as well as construction activities of other concurrent projects within 500 m assessment area.
|
· Annexes 4 and 12 of the EIAO-TM
· Prevailing Air Quality Objectives (AQO) RSP o 24-hr average conc.: 100 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 9) o Annual average conc.: 50 μg/m3 FSP o 24-hr average conc.: 50 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 18) o Annual average conc.: 25 μg/m3
· Proposed Air Quality Objectives (AQO) RSP o 24-hr average conc.: 75 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 9) o Annual average conc.: 30 μg/m3 FSP o 24-hr average conc.: 37.5 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 18) o Annual average conc.: 15 μg/m3 |
· N/A |
Regular watering on construction work areas, exposed surface and paved haul roads to dust suppression. Dust suppression measures stipulated in Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation and good site practices listed below should be carried out to further minimise construction dust impact. · Use of regular watering to reduce dust emissions from exposed site surfaces and unpaved roads, particularly during dry weather. · Use of frequent watering for particularly dusty construction areas and areas close to ASRs. · Side enclosure and covering of any aggregate or dusty material storage piles to reduce emissions. Where this is not practicable owing to frequent usage, watering shall be applied to aggregate fines. · For the work sites close to the ASR with a separation distance less than 5m, provide hoardings of not less than 5m high from ground level along the project boundary; for the work sites close to the ASRs with a separation distance less than 10 m, provide hoardings of not less than 3.5 m high from ground level along the project boundary; for the other work sites, provide hoarding not less than 2.4m high from ground level along project boundary except for site entrance or exit. · Avoid position of material stockpiling areas, major haul roads and dusty works within the construction site close to concerned ASRs. · Avoid unnecessary exposed earth. · Locate all the dusty activities away from any nearby ASRs as far as practicable. · Open stockpiles shall be avoided or covered. Where possible, prevent placing dusty material storage piles near ASRs. · Tarpaulin covering of all dusty vehicle loads transported to, from and between site locations. · Establishment and use of vehicle wheel and body washing facilities at the exit points of the site. · Where possible, routing of vehicles and positioning of construction plant should be at the maximum possible distance from ASRs. Imposition of speed controls for vehicles on site haul roads. · Instigation of an environmental monitoring and auditing program to monitor the construction process in order to enforce controls and modify method of work if dusty conditions arise. |
· No residual impacts anticipated
|
Operation Impact |
|||||
· Existing and planned residential, commercial developments and government uses within 500m from the boundary of the Project site |
Air Quality Impact NO2 · 19th highest 1-hr average conc.: 66 – 175 μg/m3 · 10th highest 24-hr average conc: 25 – 92 μg/m3 · Annual average conc.: 12 – 36 μg/m3 SO2 · 4th highest 10-min average conc: 22 –47 μg/m3 · 4th highest 24-hr average: 7 – 9 μg/m3 RSP · 10th highest 24-hr average conc: 49 – 56 μg/m3 · Annual average: 19 – 22 μg/m3 FSP · 19th highest 24-hr average conc: 28 – 33 μg/m3 · Annual average: 11 – 13 μg/m3 CO · Highest 1-hr average conc: 510 – 648 μg/m3 · Highest 8-hr average: 478 – 576 μg/m3 · Highest 24-hr average: 444 – 474 μg/m3 Methane · Highest 1-hr average conc: 4468 – 4485 μg/m3 HCl · Highest 1-hr average conc: 1.04 – 2.19 μg/m3 · Annual average: 1.00 – 1.10 μg/m3 HF · Highest 1-hr average conc: 0.00 – 0.12 μg/m3 · Annual average: 0.00 – 0.01 μg/m3 Formaldehyde · Highest 30-min average conc: 3.35 – 4.96 μg/m3 · Annual average: 1.51 – 1.65 μg/m3 Vinyl Chloride · Highest 1-hr average conc: 0.40 – 0.40 μg/m3 · Annual average: 0.33 – 0.33 μg/m3 Benzene · Highest 1-hr average conc: 2.0 – 2.0 μg/m3 · Highest 8-hr average conc: 2.0 – 2.0 μg/m3 · Annual average: 1.1 – 1.1 μg/m3 Acetaldehyde · Highest 1-hr average conc: 6.75 – 12.47 μg/m3 · Highest 8-hr average conc: 6.63 – 8.10 μg/m3 · Annual average: 1.32 – 1.36 μg/m3
|
· Prevailing AQO NO2 o 1-hr average conc.: 200 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 18) o Annual average conc.: 40 μg/m3 SO2 o 10-min average conc.: 500 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 3) o 24-hr average conc.: 50 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 3) RSP o 24-hr average conc.: 100 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 9) o Annual average conc.: 50 μg/m3 FSP o 24-hr average conc.: 50 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 18) o Annual average conc.: 25 μg/m3 CO o 1-hr average conc.: 30000 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0) o 8-hr average conc.: 10000 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0) · Proposed AQO NO2 o 1-hr average conc.: 200 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 18) o 24-hr average conc.: 120 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 9) o Annual average conc.: 40 μg/m3 SO2 o 10-min average conc.: 500 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 3) o 24-hr average conc.: 40 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 3) RSP o 24-hr average conc.: 75 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 9) o Annual average conc.: 30 μg/m3 FSP o 24-hr average conc.: 37.5 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 18) o Annual average conc.: 15 μg/m3 CO o 1-hr average conc.: 30000 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0) o 8-hr average conc.: 10000 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0) o 24-hr average conc.: 4000 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0)
· Non-AQO Methane o 1-hr average conc.: 600,000 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0) HCl o 1-hr average conc.: 2100 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0) o Annual average conc.: 20 μg/m3 HF o 1-hr average conc.: 240 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0) o Annual average conc.: 14 μg/m3 Formaldehyde o 30-min average conc.: 100 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0) o Annual average conc.: 9 μg/m3 Vinyl Chloride o 1-hr average conc.: 180000 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0) o Annual average conc.: 100 μg/m3 Benzene o 1-hr average conc.: 27 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0) o 8-hr average conc.: 3 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0) o Annual average conc.: 3 μg/m3 Acetaldehyde o 1-hr average conc.: 470 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0) o 8-hr average conc.: 300 μg/m3 (Number of exceedances allowed: 0) o Annual average conc.: 9 μg/m3
|
NO2, SO2, RSP, FSP and CO · No exceedance was predicted Methane, HCl, HF, Formaldehyde, Vinyl Chloride, Benzene and Acetaldehyde · No exceedance was predicted |
· No mitigation measure is required. · Specific site considerations are recommended to be implemented in order to avoid any potential air quality impact. Air sensitive at Site G3 (P05) use should locate at 5mAG or above. Long-term air sensitive use at Site O5 which is a proposed open space should be avoided. Air sensitive use within the exceedance zones in the proposed RTS, PFTF and CWHF of TKO 132 should be avoided |
· No residual impacts anticipated
|
• Existing and planned residential, commercial developments and government uses within 500m from the boundary of the Project site |
Odour Impact 5-second average odour concentration: 0.12 – 2.20 OU/m3 |
· Annex 4 of EIAO-TM · 5 odour units based on an averaging time of 5 seconds |
Odour · No exceedance was predicted
|
· No mitigation measure is required. |
· No residual impacts anticipated |
Noise Impact |
|||||
Construction Airborne Noise Impact |
|||||
· Representative existing residential uses, planned residential developments, and planned educational institutions within 300m from the boundary of the Project Site |
· Potential adverse construction noise impact due to construction works within the project boundary |
· Annexes 5 and 13 of the EIAO-TM · Leq(30 min) 75dB(A) at 1m from the façade of residential dwellings · Leq(30 min) 70dB(A) at 1m from the façade of Educational Institutions and 65 dB(A) during examinations · Professional Persons Environmental Consultative Committee Practice Notes (ProPECC PN1/24) |
· N/A |
· Use of Quieter Construction Methods and Quality Powered Mechanical Equipment such as use of press-in method for sheet piling; large diameter bored piling to replace percussive piling; use of hydraulic splitter / hydraulic crusher / bursting system / quieter type saw / chemical expansion agent for demolition, concrete breaking, site formation, filling and slope cutting works and removal activities; use of fully enclosed conveyor for material handling; use of mini-breaker for small boulder removal and infrastructural works; pipe jacking using tunnel boring machine for large diameter pipe laying; use of quiet type saw, robot-type hydraulic crusher or handheld concrete crusher for building works; use of pre-casting and prefabrication technology for building superstructure works; and use of self-compacting concrete or rubber head poker vibrator · Use of Noise Barrier and Noise Enclosure · Careful Scheduling of Construction Activities · Good site practices - Only well-maintained plant should be operated on site and plant should be serviced regularly. - Silencers or mufflers on construction plant should be utilised and should be properly maintained. - Mobile plant should be sited as far away from sensitive uses as possible. - Machines and plant that may be in intermittent use should be shut down between works periods or should be throttled down to a minimum. - Plant known to emit noise strongly in one direction should, where possible, be orientated so that noise is directed away from the nearby sensitive uses. - Material stockpiles and other structures should be effectively utilised to screen noise from on-site construction activities. · Submission of Construction Noise Management Plans (CNMPs) to EPD for agreement before tender invitation and before construction works commencement |
· No residual impacts anticipated |
Operation Phase Impact |
|||||
· Representative existing residential uses, place of public worship, planned residential developments and planned educational institutions within 300 m from the boundary of the Project Site |
Fixed Noise · Adverse fixed noise impact is not anticipated due to proposed fixed noise sources with good design and mitigation measures, and environmental monitoring and audit · Potential noise impact due to existing fixed noise source (SNG Plant) |
Fixed Noise · Annexes 5 and 13 of the EIAO-TM · Appropriate ANL -5 dB(A) as shown in Table 2 of IND-TM or the prevailing background noise level for planned/proposed fixed noise sources · Appropriate ANL as shown in Table 2 of IND-TM for cumulative fixed noise impact from planned and existing noise sources · EIAO-GN 16/2023 · HKPSG |
Fixed Noise · N/A |
Fixed Noise · Mitigation measure required at existing SNG Plant to alleviate any potential fixed noise impact. · For proposed fixed noise sources, use of quiet plant, enclosing plant inside buildings with opening facing away from existing/proposed/planned NSRs, install acoustic silencers, noise barrier to ensure the noise compliance of the fixed noise source. Noise commissioning test for fixed noise sources will be carried out by relevant government departments/ future operators before operation of fixed noise sources. · For various DP fixed noise sources, Fixed Noise Management Plan (FNMP) should be submitted to EPD by each of the proponent of the proposed/planned fixed noise sources · For non-DPs fixed noise sources within the Project area and existing noise sources within the assessment area affecting the proposed/planned NSRs under this Project, quantitative fixed noise impact assessment should be carried out via various planning/funding/land lease mechanism. |
· No residual impacts anticipated. |
Rail Noise · No adverse impact anticipated |
Rail Noise · Annexes 5 and 13 of the EIAO-TM |
Rail Noise N/A |
Rail Noise · Floating slab trackform, and high attenuation baseplate etc., subject to findings of a separate EIA |
· No residual impacts anticipated. |
|
Road Traffic Noise · Predicted overall noise levels: up to 73 dB(A) · Predicted road traffic noise levels of the Project roads: up to 73 dB(A)
|
Road Traffic Noise · Annexes 5 and 13 of the EIAO-TM · EIAO-GN 12/2023 · L10(1 hour) 70dB(A) at 1m from the façade of residential dwellings / noise sensitive temporary structures · L10(1 hour) 65dB(A) at 1m from the façade of educational institute
|
Road Traffic Noise · Exceedance of the noise criteria by up to 2 dB(A) for planned residential uses and up to 8 dB(A) for planned schools
|
Road Traffic Noise · Provision of low noise road surfacing (LNRS) on Local Roads L1 and L8. · Provision of at-receiver mitigation measures such as acoustic window for residential uses · Provision of noise insulation with suitable window type and air-conditioning for schools.
|
Road Traffic Noise · No residual impacts anticipated. |
|
Marine Traffic Noise · Predicted cumulative peak marine traffic hour Leq(1-hr) of 49 to 63 dB(A) · Predicted peak marine traffic hour Leq(1-hr) of 40 to 58 dB(A) due to Project-related vessels |
Marine Traffic Noise · Measured Prevailing noise level (Leq(1-hr)) during peak marine traffic hour (ranged from 54 to 64 dB(A)) |
Marine Traffic Noise · No exceedance predicted |
Marine Traffic Noise · No mitigation measure required |
Marine Traffic Noise · No residual impacts anticipated. |
|
Water Quality Impact |
|||||
Construction Impact |
|||||
· Seawater intakes, secondary contact recreation subzone, ecological and fisheries sensitive receivers such as coral communities and fish culture zones |
· Full compliances with water quality assessment criteria were predicted except for suspended solids (up to 15.8 mg/L) and sedimentation rates (up to 650g/m2/day) |
· EIAO-TM Annexes 6 and 14 · Water Quality Objectives (WQOs) stipulated under Water Pollution Control Ordinance (WPCO) · Technical Memorandum Standards for Effluents Discharged into Drainage and Sewerage Systems, Inland and Coastal Waters (TM-DSS) · Water Supplies Department (WSD) Water Quality Criteria for Flushing Water Intakes · Raw water quality design basis values for the first stage of TKO desalination plant |
· Exceedance of the assessment criteria for suspended solids elevations by up to 12 mg/L for coral communities near TKO 132 · Exceedance of the sedimentation criteria by up to 550 g/m2/day for coral communities near TKO 132 |
· Deployment of silt curtains around marine construction works · Mitigation measures and good site practices in ProPECC PN 2/23 · Precautionary measures in ETWB Technical Circular (Works) No. 5/2005 · Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation · Provision of interim treatment facilities, such as chemical toilets, for construction workforce · Use of non-dredged reclamation method · Carrying out underwater filling behind leading seawall · Control of production rates for reclamation / sediment removal works |
· No residual water quality impact |
Operation Impact |
|||||
· Seawater intakes, secondary contact recreation subzone, ecological and fisheries sensitive receivers such as coral communities and fish culture zones |
· Full compliances with water quality assessment criteria were predicted at all representative WSRs except for 10 WSRs where the predicted TIN level exceeded the WQO and 1 WSR where the predicted E. coli level exceeded the WQO.
|
· EIAO-TM Annexes 6 and 14 · WQOs stipulated under WPCO · TM-DSS · WSD Water Quality Criteria for Flushing Water Intakes · Raw water quality design basis values for the first stage of TKO desalination plant |
· For the 10 WSRs with WQO exceedances for TIN (including bathing beaches, coral sites, Shek O headland SSSI, important spawning/nursery ground of commercial fisheries resources), there is no noticeable difference in the predicted TIN levels between all the modelling scenarios (i.e., with or without the Project). These exceedances are not caused by this Project. · For the 1 WSR with WQO exceedance for E.coli (Po Toi O FCZ), there is no noticeable difference in the predicted E.coli levels between all the modelling scenarios (i.e., with or without the Project). These exceedances are not caused by this Project. |
· Precautionary design measures to prevent emergency discharges from EPP and SPS · Emergency Contingency Plan to deal with power / treatment failure at EPP and SPS · Design measures and practices in ProPECC PN 1/23 · Develop and implement Environmental Management Plan for Public Facilities at TKO 132 · Best management practices for storm water management · DSD's “Sewerage Manual (Part 2) Pumping Stations and Rising Mains” |
· No residual water quality impact |
Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Implications |
|||||
· Existing and planned sewerage system, sewage treatment and disposal facilities |
· Increase in sewage discharge arising from the population and potential waterborne pollution |
• DSD’s Sewerage Manual, Drainage Record Plan and standard drawings; • EPD’s Guidelines for Estimating Sewage Flows for Sewage Infrastructure Planning (GESF) Version 1.0; and • Annex 14 of the EIAO-TM
|
· N/A |
· Precautionary design measures to prevent emergency discharges from EPP and SPS · Emergency Contingency Plan to deal with power / treatment failure at EPP and SPS
|
· N/A |
Waste Management Implications |
|||||
Construction Impact |
|||||
· N/A
|
· Around 123,500 m3 of non-inert C&D materials and 5,164,970 m3 of inert C&D materials will be generated from reclamation, site clearance, site formation works, construction of viaducts, buildings and infrastructures. · Chemical wastes will be generated from plant operation and maintenance of mechanical equipment, at a few hundred litres per month. · Around 2,535 kg per day and 585 kg per day of general refuse will be generated from construction works and site- based staff and workers at TKO 137 and TKO 132 respectively. · Approximately 9,951m3 of sediment from TKO 137 and 184,601 m3 of sediment from TKO 132 will be disposed of at the marine disposal areas. · Around 6.8 m3 per year at TKO 137 and 4.4 m3 per year at TKO 132 of floating refuse will be generated from construction activities at / near the sea and accumulation along seawall. |
· Annexes 7 and 15 of the EIAO-TM · Waste Disposal Ordinance (Cap. 354) · Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation (Cap. 354C) · Waste Disposal (Charges for Disposal of Construction Waste) Regulation (Cap. 354N) · Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28) · Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap. 132BK) – Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances Regulation · Dumping at Sea Ordinance (DASO) (Cap.466) · Project Administration Handbook for Civil Engineering Works (PAH) |
· N/A |
· Implementation of good site practices, waste reduction measures and proper storage, collection and transport of waste · Careful design, planning and good site management to reduce generation of C&D materials · Monitoring of disposal of C&D waste with trip-ticket system and installing CCTV on site |
· No residual impact anticipated |
Operation Impact |
|||||
· N/A |
· Around 350 tonnes per day of municipal solid waste will be generated from TKO 137 and TKO 132 · Small quantity of chemical wastes in the order of a few cubic metres per month will be generated from maintenance and service activities and laboratories in education institutions at TKO 137. · Around 40 tonnes per day of concrete waste and sludge will be generated from operation of the concrete batching plant and construction waste handling facility at TKO 132 · About 27 m3/day of sewage sludge and 26 m3/day of screening and grits will be generated from TKO 137 EPP and TKO 132 SPS. · Around 6.8 m3 per year at TKO 137 and 4.4 m3 per year at TKO 132 of floating refuse will be generated from accumulation along seawall. |
· Annexes 7 and 15 of the EIAO-TM · Waste Disposal Ordinance (Cap. 354) · Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation (Cap. 354C) · Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap. 132BK) – Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances Regulation |
· N/A |
· Implementation of waste reduction measures and proper storage, collection and transport of waste |
· No residual impact anticipated |
Land Contamination |
|||||
· Onsite construction workers and future occupants |
· 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 at TKO 137 within the Project area. |
· Annex 19 of the EIAO-TM · Guidance Note for Contaminated Land Assessment and Remediation (EPD, April 2023) · Practice Guide for Investigation and Remediation of Contaminated Land (EPD, April 2023) · Guidance Manual for Use of Risk-based Remediation Goals for Contaminated Land Management (EPD, April 2023) |
· N/A |
· A sampling and testing programme, targeting the hotspot identified within Site S1 had been proposed. · Further site appraisal should be carried out for the two concerned 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 the two concerned 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. · The further works including further site appraisal, associated SI works, any necessary remediation works and submission of CAP, CAR / RAP / RR would follow the relevant Guidance Manual, Guidance Note and Practice Guide. |
· No residual impact anticipated. |
Landfill Gas Hazard |
|||||
Construction Impact |
|||||
· Onsite construction workers |
· Quantitative landfill gas hazard is conservatively assessed as “Medium” or “Low” risk for construction phase based on the source, pathway and target risk categories for the proposed development located within the Consultation Zone for the SENT and SENTX. |
· Annex 7 & 19 of the EIAO-TM · Landfill Gas Hazard Assessment Guidance Note |
· N/A |
· Safety requirements stated in Chapter 8 - Hazards Arising During Construction of the Landfill Gas Hazard Assessment Guidance Note should be implemented properly during construction phase. |
· No residual impact anticipated. |
Operation Impact |
|||||
· Future occupants |
· Quantitative landfill gas hazard is conservatively assessed as “High”, “Medium” or “Low”, for operation phase based on the source, pathway and target risk categories for the proposed development located within the Consultation Zone for the SENT and SENTX. |
· Annex 7 & 19 of the EIAO-TM · Landfill Gas Hazard Assessment Guidance Note |
· N/A |
· “Passive” and “Active” control measures should be considered for developments categorised as “Medium” or “High” Risk respectively. · For developments of which the landfill gas risk is categorised as “Low”, some precautionary measures may be required to ensure that the planned development is safe, however the measures which depend on the actual design of indoor facilities if any (such as toilets). |
· No residual impact anticipated. |
Ecological Impact (Terrestrial and Marine) |
|||||
Construction Impact |
|||||
· Recognised sites of conservation importance and other ecologically sensitive sites · Terrestrial and marine habitats · Wildlife (including flora and fauna species of conservation importance)
|
· Major permanent loss of sea area (subtidal hard substrata habitat) · Permanent and temporary loss of natural habitats including terrestrial habitat (mixed woodland, shrubland, shrubby grassland/grassland), intertidal habitat (rocky shore and soft shore), and sea area (subtidal soft substrata habitats) · Direct impact on floral species of conservation importance and hard and black coral communities · Potential direct injury / mortality of wildlife species · Indirect disturbance impact (e.g. air quality, noise, light pollution, water quality, traffic and visual) on natural habitats and associated wildlife in the vicinity |
· Annexes 8 and 16 of the EIAO-TM · EIAO Guidance Notes Nos. 3/2010, 6/2010, 7/2023 and 10/2023 |
· N/A |
· Avoided loss of site of conservation importance and other ecologically sensitive sites · Avoided direct impact on nesting Black Kite and potential movement corridor of Philippine Neon Goby, as well as the stream (i.e. S2) which the Goby was previously recorded. · Minimisation of adverse impact to recognised site of conservation importance and natural habitats · Minimisation on the direct loss of terrestrial and marine natural habitats and associated wildlife through careful design of the Project layout · Translocation of affected coral colonies with high ecological value · Protection / transplantation of floral species of conservation importance · Minimisation of direct mortality of wildlife · Pre-construction survey to identify the presence of faunal species of conservation importance within the Project area, esp. breeding site and low mobility species · Good site practices with mitigation measures for noise, dust, light and glare and water quality (esp. marine water) impacts |
· No unacceptable residual impact anticipated |
Operation Impact |
|||||
· Recognised Sites of Conservation Importance and Other Ecologically Sensitive Sites · Terrestrial and Marine Habitats · Wildlife (including flora and fauna species of conservation importance) |
· Temporary loss of subtidal soft substrata due to maintenance sediment removal in TKO 132 · Indirect disturbance impact (e.g. air quality, noise, light pollution, water quality, traffic and visual) on natural habitats and associated wildlife in the vicinity · Changes in hydrodynamic properties and water quality pattern |
· Same as construction phase |
· N/A |
· Minimisation of direct impact on hard coral communities through careful consideration on the extend of maintenance sediment removal (i.e. conduct only in area with water depth >8m) · Adoption of planning design subject to its feasibility (e.g. vegetation buffer) to minimise potential injury / mortality of wildlife · Good site practices with mitigation measures for noise, dust, light and glare and water quality (esp. marine water) impacts · Enhancement measures including eco-shoreline / ecological enhanced seawall to provide additional hard substrata for the recolonisation of intertidal fauna and corals · Greening opportunity on buildings such as green façades and green roofs |
· No unacceptable residual impact anticipated |
Fisheries Impact |
|||||
· Fish Culture Zones in Tung Lung Chau and Po Toi O, spawning grounds of commercial fisheries resources at eastern waters, nursery area of commercial fisheries resources at Port Shelter, Artificial Reefs at Outer Port Shelter |
· Direct loss of fishing ground and fisheries habitat · Changes in water quality · Change in hydrodynamics · Underwater sound |
· EIAO-TM Annexes 9 & 17 · Water Pollution Control Ordinance (Cap. 358) |
· N/A |
· Mitigation measures and good site practices as proposed in Water Quality section would further minimise fisheries impacts. |
· No residual impact anticipated |
Cultural Heritage Impact |
|||||
Construction Impact |
|||||
· Built heritage and other identified items |
· No adverse impact on built heritages and other identified items would be anticipated. |
· EIAO-TM Annexes 10 and 19
|
· N/A |
· No mitigation measures would be required. |
· No residual impact anticipated |
· Terrestrial archaeological heritage |
· No direct impact on terrestrial archaeological heritage is anticipated except the areas on Fat Tau Chau within the Project boundary of TKO137 on which there would possibly be potential impact during the construction phase. · Indirect impacts of ground-borne vibration, tilting and ground settlement are anticipated on Fat Tau Chau House Ruin SAI (SAI185) |
· EIAO-TM Annexes 10 and 19 · Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (A&MO) (Cap.53) |
· N/A |
Monitoring of vibration, settlement and tilting · A condition and structural survey, as well as a baseline vibration review shall be conducted for construction works located in close proximity to the Fat Tau Chau House Ruin SAI (SAI185). · Condition and structural survey should be carried out for Fat Tau Chau House Ruin SAI (SAI185) both before and after all construction works to inspect its physical condition and structural integrity. The pre- and post- condition survey reports should be submitted for AMO’s record. · 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 for Fat Tau Chau House Ruin SAI during the construction phase. The baseline vibration review should be submitted to AMO for comment and agreement before implementation. · Any vibration and building movement induced from the construction works should be strictly monitored to ensure no disturbance and physical damages made to the heritage sites during the course of works. If monitoring of ground-borne vibration is required, a monitoring proposal, including vibration limit, type of monitoring, checkpoint locations, installation details and frequency of monitoring should be submitted by contractor to AMO for agreement before commencement of the works. Prior agreement and consent should be sought from the owner(s), stakeholder(s) and relevant Government department(s) for the installation of monitoring points on the archaeological heritage before commencement of the works. · Should the monitoring data be approaching to the vibration limit, the contractor shall propose measures to mitigate movement situation at the heritage site for consideration by AMO and implement on site, with examples, not limited to, increasing monitoring frequency, additional condition surveys, amendment / review of design of the construction, etc., so that the concerned archaeological heritage would be protected and preserved. · AMO should be informed immediately should irregularities be observed.
Dust Suppression · Due to the close proximity of the Fat Tau Chau House Ruin SAI (SAI185) to the Project Boundary, dust from the works area might have potential impact. 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).
Buffer Zone · A buffer zone should be reserved during the construction phase of the Project to safeguard Fat Tau Chau House Ruin SAI (SAI185). · The buffer zone should be established in the form of physical barrier to separate the works area from the concerned structures. · No works shall be allowed within the buffer zone. No workers or any construction related equipment and materials should trespass the buffer zone to avoid direct contact with Fat Tau Chau House Ruin SAI (SAI185). · It is suggested that the buffer zone should be of 10m from the concerned SAI or as practical as possible. Considering the challenging terrain of the environment nearby, implementation details shall be proposed by the contractor and agreed with AMO prior to commencement of the proposed works. Archaeological Impact Assessment at the detailed design phase · To ensure no archaeological resources related to the Customs Station or other facilities 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 relations 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 if necessary, 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 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.
Precautionary Measure · 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.
|
· No residual impact anticipated |
· Marine archaeological heritage |
· No impact on marine archaeology is anticipated from this project. |
· EIAO-TM Annexes 10 and 19 · Guidelines for Marine Archaeological Investigation |
· N/A |
· As a precautionary measure, it is recommended to designate the locations with data gaps and the uninvestigated anomaly as archaeological exclusion zones 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. |
· No residual impact anticipated. |
Operation Impact |
|||||
· Built heritage and other identified items |
· No adverse impact would be anticipated on built heritages and other identified items during the operational phase. |
· EIAO-TM Annexes 10 and 19
|
· N/A |
· No mitigation measure would be required. |
· No residual impact anticipated. |
· Terrestrial archaeological heritage |
· No adverse impact would be anticipated on terrestrial archaeology during the operational phase. |
· EIAO-TM Annexes 10 and 19 |
· N/A |
· No mitigation measure would be required. |
· No residual impact anticipated. |
· Marine archaeological heritage |
· No impact on marine archaeology is anticipated from this project. |
· EIAO-TM Annexes 10 and 19 · Guidelines for Marine Archaeological Investigation |
· N/A |
· No mitigation measure would be required. |
· No residual impact anticipated. |
Landscape and Visual Impacts |
|||||
Construction Impact |
|||||
· Landscape Resources (LRs) |
· Negligible impact on hillside vegetation along Eastern Boundary of TKO 137 (LR5), SENT Landfill (LR7), vegetation on modified slope and amenity planting (LR10) and vegetation in developed area (LR14) · Slight impact on the vegetation along drainage channel (LR4), roadside planting (LR8) and orchard/ vegetation near rural settlement (LR12) · Moderate impact on the vegetation within TKO 137 (LR1), hillside vegetation at Devil’s Peak (LR2), shrubland at Tit Cham Chau and Fat Tong Chau (LR3), portion of 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) |
· Annexes 10 and 18 of the EIAO – TM · EIAO – GN 8/2023 |
· NA |
· Tree Preservation and Transplantation · Preservation of Natural Coastline · Erection of Decorative Screen Hoarding · Management of Construction Activities and Facilities · Reinstatement of the affected landscaped area |
· Negligible residual impact on LR5, LR7, LR10 and LR14 · Slight residual impact on LR4, LR8 and LR12 · Moderate residual impact on LR1, LR2, LR3, LR6, LR9, LR11 and LR13 |
· Landscape Character Areas (LCAs) |
· Negligible impact on SENT Landfill and Ongoing Major Development Landscape (LCA6), TKO Industrial Urban Landscape (LCA7), Junk Bay Cemetery Landscape (LCA10), Tiu Keng Leng Urban Residential Landscape (LCA11) · Slight impact on Fat Tong O Industrial Urban Landscape (LCA8), TKO Transportation Corridor Landscape (LCA9) · Moderate impact on Fat Tong O Reclamation Landscape (LCA1), Fat Tong Chau and Tin Ha Au Upland and Hillside Landscape (LCA2), Chiu King Wan Upland and Hillside Landscape (LCA3), Tathong Channel and Joss House Bay Inshore Water Landscape (LCA4), Junk Bay Bay Landscape (LCA5) |
· Annexes 10 and 18 of the EIAO – TM · EIAO – GN 8/2023 |
· NA |
· Tree Preservation and Transplantation · Preservation of Natural Coastline · Erection of Decorative Screen Hoarding · Management of Construction Activities and Facilities · Reinstatement of the affected landscaped area |
· Negligible residual impact on LCA6, LCA7, LCA10 and LCA11 · Slight residual impact LCA8 and LCA9 · Moderate residual impact LCA1, LCA2, LCA3, LCA4 and LCA5 |
Operation Impact |
|||||
· Landscape Resources (LRs) |
· Negligible impact on hillside vegetation along Eastern Boundary (LR5) of TKO 137, SENT Landfill (LR7), vegetation on modified slope and amenity planting (LR10), vegetation in developed area (LR14) · Slight impact on vegetation along drainage channel (LR4), roadside planting (LR8), orchard/ vegetation near rural settlement (LR12) · Moderate impact on the 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), sandy shore along western coastline of Junk Bay (LR13) |
· Annexes 10 and 18 of the EIAO – TM · EIAO – GN 8/2023 |
· Aesthetically pleasing design of Aboveground Structures · Buffer Screen Planting · Roof Greening · Roadside Greening · Open Space provision · Compensatory Tree Planting · Landscape Treatments on Slope or Retaining Structure · Shoreline Treatment |
Upon Day 1 of operation: · Negligible residual impact on LR5, LR7, LR10 and LR14 · Slight residual impact on LR1, LR2, LR3, LR4, LR8, LR11 and LR12 · Moderate residual impact on LR6, LR9 and LR13
Upon Year 10 of operation · Negligible residual impact on LR1, LR2, LR3, LR4, LR5, LR7, LR8, LR10, LR11, LR12 and LR14 · Slight residual impact on LR9 and LR13 · Moderate residual impact on LR6 |
|
· Landscape Character Areas (LCAs) |
· Negligible impact on SENT Landfill and Ongoing Major Development Landscape (LCA6), TKO Industrial Urban Landscape (LCA7), Junk Bay Cemetery Landscape (LCA10), Tiu Keng Leng Urban Residential Landscape (LCA11) · Slight impact Fat Tong O Industrial Urban Landscape (LCA8), TKO Transportation Corridor Landscape (LCA9) · Moderate to substantial impact on Fat Tong O Reclamation Landscape (LCA1), Fat Tong Chau and Tin Ha Au Upland and Hillside Landscape (LCA2), Chiu King Wan Upland and Hillside Landscape (LCA3), Tathong Channel and Joss House Bay Inshore Water Landscape (LCA4), Junk Bay Bay Landscape (LCA5) |
· Annexes 10 and 18 of the EIAO – TM · EIAO – GN 8/2023 |
· Aesthetically pleasing design of Aboveground Structures · Buffer Screen Planting · Roof Greening · Roadside Greening · Open Space provision · Compensatory Tree Planting · Landscape Treatments on Slope or Retaining Structure · Shoreline Treatment |
Upon Day 1 of operation: · Negligible residual impact on LCA6, LCA7, LCA10 and LCA11 · Slight residual impact LCA1, LCA2, LCA3, LCA8 and LCA9 · Moderate residual impact on LCA4 and LCA5 Upon Year 10 of operation: · Negligible residual impact on LCA1, LCA2, LCA3, LCA6, LCA7, LCA8, LCA9, LCA10 and LCA11 · Moderate residual impact LCA4 and LCA5 |
|
· Key Public Viewpoint (VPs) |
· Slight impact on view from Waterfront of LOHAS Park (VP3), view from TKO InnoPark (VP6) and view from Tseung Lam Highway Garden (VP12) · Moderate impact on view from view from dragon’s Back Trail (VP1), Siu Sai Wan Promenade (VP2), view from TKO Waterfront Park (VP4), view from LOHAS Park (VP5), view from Tung Lung Chau Lookout (VP9) and view from the Heng Fa Chuen Promenade (VP11) · Substantial impact on view from lookout of the Devil’s Peak (VP7), view from Tin Ha Shan (VP8), view from the traveller along the ferry route along the Tathong Channel (VP10) |
· Annexes 10 and 18 of the EIAO – TM · EIAO – GN 8/2023 |
· Aesthetically pleasing design of Aboveground Structures · Buffer Screen Planting · Roof Greening · Roadside Greening · Open Space provision · Compensatory Tree Planting · Landscape Treatments on Slope or Retaining Structure · Shoreline Treatment |
Upon Day 1 of operation: · Sight residual impact on VP1, VP3, VP4, VP5, VP6 and VP12 · Moderate residual impact on VP2, VP9 and VP11 · Substantial residual impact on VP7, VP8 and VP10
Upon Year 10 of operation: · Negligible residual impact on VP1, VP3, VP4, VP5, VP6 and VP12 · Sight residual impact on VP2, VP9 and VP11 · Moderate residual impact on VP7, VP8 and VP10
|
|
Hazard to Life |
|||||
· Existing and planned population in the vicinity of the planned desalination plant, existing SNG production plant, proposed EPP, explosive off-loading pier and proposed green fuel station (GFS) |
· The off-site individual risk level is far below 1×10-5 per year for the planned desalination plant and proposed EPP, while the 1×10-5 per year is confined within the plant boundary for the existing SNG production plant and proposed GFS. Thus, it is considered acceptable and in compliance with the relevant criterion in Annex 4 of EIAO-TM · The societal risks fall within the “Acceptable” region in both assessment years · No foreseeable risk implication on the Project as the explosive off-loading pier will be decommissioned before commencement of construction activities within 500m from the pier |
· Annex 4 of the EIAO-TM |
· N/A |
· No adverse impact is anticipated. |
· No residual impact anticipated |
Electric and Magnetic Field |
|||||
· Proposed EFs and Electricity Substation |
· Maximum electric field strength anticipated to be up to 10 V/m · Maximum magnetic flux anticipated to be up to 72 μT · Both electric field strength and magnetic flux density comply with criteria. No adverse electric and magnetic field impact would be anticipated. |
· International Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection 1998 (Standard for General Public Exposure: 5,000 V/m & 100 μT; Standard for Occupational Exposure 10,000 V/m & 500 μT) · Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines |
· N/A |
· Not necessary |
· No residual impact anticipated |
[1] The CWHF to be provided in TKO 132 may also incorporate the function of the temporary construction waste sorting facility (temp. CWSF) currently located in TKO 137. Unlike the existing open air operation at the temp. CWSF, such future operation, if any, will be carried out in enclosed environment.
[2] The MRCP was proposed during the PODP stage and has been excluded from the RODP.
[3] The EFs are a strategic infrastructure that will account for about 30% of Hong Kong total fuel mix
for electricity generation for enhancing Hong Kong’s capability to import zero-carbon energy through
regional cooperation and meeting the decarbonisation target of reducing Hong Kong’s carbon emissions by 50% before 2035 as compared to the 2005 level, with a view to achieving carbon neutrality before 2050.
[4] Location of JBDGA is extracted from Marine Chart by Marine Department’s “eSeaGo”