| Stakeholder |
Key Concerns |
Follow-up Actions |
| Professional Bodies & Institutions (HKIP, HKWMA, ECMA and BCC) |
- Technical feasibility of relocating the existing SENT Landfill infrastructure
|
- The programme for developing the Extension has allowed for constructing the new infrastructure area first before demolishing the existing infrastructure so that the new infrastructure will be ready to handle the flows and loadsinfrastructure needs of the existing landfill and the Extension.
|
|
|
- This was addressed in the TIA and it was found that landfill traffic only represents a small proportion of overall traffic in the vicinity.
|
|
|
- This was addressed in the EIA and it was found that the visual impact will become insubstantial to slight when the landfill is restored. It will further reduce to insubstantial as vegetation is established at the restored landfill.
- The EIA has also recommended advance tree planting along some sections of the High Junk Peak Trail to screen the view of the Extension.
|
- Landfill restoration and potential afteruse
|
- The restoration design of the landfill will ensure leachate and landfill gas are managed in a safe manner.
- After restoration, the landfill will be suitable for passive recreational uses. The potential afteruse will be investigated and examined in subsequent stages of the project.
|
- Temporary Encroachment into Country Park and the need to provide off-site compensation
|
- Options without encroachment into the Country Park have been developed and examined but were not recommended for preferred option because they cannot provide adequate void capacity to meet territorial and regional demand for waste disposal outlet (further information on options selection is provided in the EIA Report).
- On-site compensation by woodland plantation has been proposed in the EIA to enhance the ecological value of the encroached area.
- Off-site compensation for Country Park is outside the current mechanism of designating Country Park by AFCD.
|
