3.                            NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

 

3.1                        Introduction

 

3.1.1                  This chapter presents the potential noise impacts associated with the construction and operation of Spur Line. Cumulative impacts with other concurrent projects are also addressed. Mitigation monitoring and audit requirements are described.

 

3.1.2                  The railway operation noise assessment is based on train speed profile and alignment information supplied by KCRC up to 10 November 1999.

 

3.2                        Noise Assessment Criteria

 

                 Construction Phase

 

3.2.1                  Under Technical Memorandum (TM) on Environmental Impact Assessment Process, the day-time noise criterion is 75 dB(A). The criterion for educational establishment is 70 dB(A) on normal days and 65 dB(A) during examination periods.

 

3.2.2                  Should works be required during restricted hours, i.e. 1900 to 0700 hours or at any time on a general holiday, a Construction Noise Permit (CNP) must be obtained before works are allowed to take place. Percussive piling works are also subjected to licensing under the Noise Control Ordinance (NCO).

 

                 Operational Phase

 

3.2.3                  Railway operation noise must comply with the standards specified[1]. These include:

 

                 • maximum A-weighted sound pressure level, Lmax at 85 dB (2300 – 0700 hours); and

 

                 • the Acceptable Noise Levels (ANL) for the appropriate Area Sensitivity Rating (ASR)[2]. The ANLs for 07:00 to 23:00 hours and 23:00 to 07:00 hours daily are 60/65/70 and 50/55/60 dB(A) for ASRs A/B/C respectively.

 

3.2.4                  Noise from fixed plant must be limited to:

 

                 • 5 dB(A) below the ANL for the appropriate ASR[3], or

 

                 •       not more than the prevailing background noise levels.

 

3.2.5                  In any event, the ASR assumed in this EIA report is for indicative assessment only given that details of the plant layout are not yet available. It should be noted that fixed noise sources are controlled under Section 13 of the NCO. At the time of investigation, the Noise Control Authority shall determine noise impact from concerned fixed noise sources on the basis of prevailing legislation and practices being in force, and taking account of contemporary conditions / situations of adjoining land uses. Nothing in this EIA report shall bind the Noise Control Authority in the context of law enforcement against any fixed or construction noise sources being assessed.

 

3.2.6                  A complete set of environmental legislation and standards related to construction noise is given in Appendix A.

 

3.3                        Representative Noise Sensitive Receivers

 

3.3.1                  A site survey and desk study of government survey maps and Outline Zoning Plans were conducted to check the existing and planned land uses of all the noise sensitive receivers within 300 m of either side of the railway alignment. Representative Noise Sensitive Receivers (RNSRs) were selected from these noise sensitive receivers to represent both existing and future land uses worst affected by the proposed railway development. Where NSRs are represented by high rise buildings, the floor having direct line of sight, and having the shortest distance to the noise source, was selected for noise level calculations.

 

3.3.2                  Figure 3.1 presents the locations of these RNSRs and the proposed land use of the area based on the information of the latest Outline Zoning Plans (OZPs) published for these areas. The OZPs referenced include S/FSS/8, S/NE-KTN/3, and S/YL-ST/1. Table 3.1 gives the details of each of these RNSRs and the type of noise sensitive land use they represent.

 

3.3.3                  The future developments proposed under the North East New Territories (NENT) Planning and Development Study is likely to introduce new noise sensitive receivers to the Kwu Tung area. At present no details of specific receivers are available and this noise assessment will therefore consider representative NSRs from information provided by the Project Proponent of the NENT Study.Any future developments must take into account the presence of the Spur Line and the findings of this assessment when considering their own environmental requirements.

Table 3.1  Details of Representative Noise Sensitive Receivers

 

RNSR

MPD at Ground Level

Description of Existing Use

No. of Storeys of Existing Use

Description of Future Use Based on Outline Zoning Plans and Approved Planning Applications

Estimated No. of Storeys of Future  Use

Area Sensitivity Ratings *

1

+9.7

Hong Kong Taoist Association Tang Hin Memorial Secondary School

6

School situated within R(A) zone.

6

B

2

+7.7

Sheung Shui Centre Block 1

30

R(A)

30

B

3

+8.8

Tong Wu Mansion, Yuk Po Court

30

R(A)

30

B

4

+7.7

Christian Alliance Primary School

6

G(IC) (Likely to remain as school)

6

B

5

+8.9

Choi Ping House, Choi Yuen Estate

30

R(A)

30

B

6

+7.6

Low rise commercial / residential  building at San Fung Avenue

4

C/R

4

B

7

+9.2

Choi Pic Mansion, Choi Po Court

30

R(A)

30

B

8

+7.7

Low rise commercial / residential  building on San Fung Avenue

3

C/R

3

B

9

+9.2

Choi Ying Mansion, Choi Po Court

30

R(A)

30

C

10

+6.3

Village house at Tai Tau Leng

3

V

3

B

11

+6.1

Village house at Tsung Pak Long

3

V

3

A

12

+5.4

Tsung Pak Long Village Primary School

1

V

1

A

13

+5.9

Village House

1

AGR

3

A

14

+5.5

Village House

1

AGR

3

A

15

+6.5

Village house at Ho Sheung Heung

1

V

3

A

16

+6.4

Village House

1

CDA

3

(As detailed in the OZP No. S/NE-KTN/3)

B

17

+7.9

Village House

1

I(D)

3

B

18

+7.5

Village House

1

OS

1

B

19

+13.1

Kindergarten

1

G(IC)

1

B

21

+15.7

Village House

2

OS

3

B

22

+18

Village House

1

O

1

B

23

+23.1

Village House

1

AGR

1

B

24

+17.7

Village House

2

AGR

2

B

25

+12

Village House

1

GB

1

A

26

+6.5

Village House

2

GB

2

A

27

+6.7

Village House

1

GB

1

A

28

+5.3

Village House

1

U

1

A

29

+4.5

Village House

1

U

1

A

30

+3.4

Village House

1

U

1

A

31

+3.2

Village House

1

CA

1

A

32

+3.2

Village House

1

CA

1

A

33

+2.9

Village House

2

CA

2

A

34

+8.0

Village House

2

GB

2

A

35

+7.2

Village House

1

U

1

A

 

 

*                    As specified in the letter from Director of Environmental Protection dated 28 July 1999 Ref. EP2/G/A/101.

**         RNSR 20 will be resumed for use as temporary works area

***         RNSRs 34 and 35 are used for assessing potential construction noise impact at Lok Ma Chau Road only

R(A)         Residential Development Group A, high density, high rise

CDA         Comprehensive Development Area, can be commercial and residential, density medium

                      to high

V         Village. Low rise, low density, often detached house.

O                   Open Space

AGR         Agricultural

OS                 Open Storage

I(D)         Industrial Group D

GB         Green Belt

CA         Conservation Areas

U         Unspecified

 

3.4                        Construction Noise Assessment

 

3.4.1                  This section presents the methodology, representative sensitive receivers, relevant assessment criteria, and up to date findings on the potential construction noise impact due to the development of the Spur Line. As the Main Drainage Channel Realignment Works at River Beas is expected to be largely complete by 2001 there will be no extensive cumulative construction noise impact with the Spur Line Project.

 

3.4.2                  The only other concurrent infrastructure Project is the construction works for the San Tin Drainage Channel at Lok Ma Chau which is likely to start construction in 2002 to 2003. Based on the findings of the Final Report of the Environmental Impact Assessment for Main Drainage Channels and Poldered Village Protection Scheme for San Tin, NWNT, predicted construction noise levels of San Tin Channel construction are likely to range between 48~66 dB(A). In view of the low construction noise levels relative to the noise assessment criteria, the San Tin Drainage Channel project is not expected to cause a cumulative noise impact alongside the development of the Spur Line.

 

                 Assessment Methodology

 

3.4.3                  The construction noise assessment was undertaken using the methodology given in the Technical Memorandum on Noise from Construction Works other than Percussive Piling of the NCO.

 

                 Construction Schedule and Equipment

 

3.4.4                  Based on the project implementation programme dated 1 August 1999,  the construction activities which are likely to result in potential noise impact will occur at the following times:

 

 

Table 3.2

Concurrent Construction Activities under this Project Considered for Cumulative Construction Noise Impact

 

 

 

 

Groups of Concurrent Activities

Construction Activities

Scheduled Time

Representative Noise Sensitive Receivers Affected

A

Site formation for temporary works areas, new permanent access roads, and Lok Ma Chau Terminus

Hard rock removal at Pak Shek Au

Haul roads construction.

February 2001 ~ February 2002

21, 22, 28, 29, 30

Lok Ma Chau Terminus construction is over 500 m from any Representative Noise Sensitive Receivers, and noise contribution from these activities is not significant

Lok Ma Chau Terminus construction, which include:

·         Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) construction

·         Open drainage channel.

·         Box culvert.

·         Underground sewage treatment works.

·         Retaining structure.

·         Immigration / customs facilities.

·         Head wall.

July 2001 ~ March 2004

N.A.

 

Foot bridge link to Huanggang.

February 2001 ~ February 2003

31 ~ 33

B

West Section Alignment : Bore piling, pile cap formation, column formation, viaduct deck installation

March 2001 ~ January 2003

22 ~ 33

 

East Section Alignment : Bore piling, pile cap formation, column formation, viaduct deck installation

April 2001 ~ December 2002

13 ~ 19, 21

C

This group is only concurrent in February 2003

Improvement works to existing Sheung Shui Station, and other ancillary structures such as footbridges, foot paths, and subways.

February 2003 ~ July 2003

1 ~ 15

 

Water mains diversion near Sheung Shui

October 2000 ~ July 2003

(Only in winter when the mains are shut down)

7 ~ 12

D

Widening of Lok Ma Chau Road as access road

July 2001 - March 2004

34, 35

3.4.5                  The likely type, quantity and the SWL for each type of Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) used during the construction stage are listed in Table B1, Appendix B. It should be noted that an assumption has been made of the likely equipment to be used. The actual construction equipment will be determined by the contractors performing the works.

 

                 Assessment Results

 

3.4.6                  Table B.2 of Appendix B gives the unmitigated predicted noise levels for various construction activities. Table 3.3 gives a comparison of unmitigated predicted noise levels with noise assessment criteria.

 

Table 3.3

Comparison of Unmitigated and Mitigated Predicted Noise Levels with

Noise Criteria for RNSRs Potentially Affected by Construction Noise

 

Construction Activity Group Considered

Representative Noise Sensitive Receivers

(RNSRs)

Distance from Activities,

m

Unmitigated Noise Levels at Worst Affected RNSRs (dB(A))

Exceed Noise Assessment Criteria by :

(dB(A))

Noise Reduction due to Installation of Noise Barrier

Mitigated Noise Levels at Worst Affected RNSRs (dB(A))

Exceed Noise Assessment Criteria by : (dB(A)

A1–

Site Formation

19

21

22

27

50

50

100

100

79

79

73

73

9

4

0

0

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

7274

7274

6668

6668

24

0

0

0

A2–

Hard Material Removal

21

22

23

24

 

50

25

80

15

77

83

73

87

(1st month)

65

71

61

75

(2nd

and 3rd months)

2

8

0

12

(1st month)

0

0

0

0

(2nd

and 3rd months)

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

-5

7072

7678

6668

8082

(1st month)

6567

7173

6163

7577

(2nd

and 3rd months)

02

13

0

57

(1st month)

0**

0

0

02

(2nd

and 3rd months)

A3-

Footbridge Construction

33

650

59

0

-

59

0

B

(only noisiest part of alignment construction presented)

13

14

22

24

25

27

28

29

30

31

32

 

30

30

30

30

25

40

60

60

60

50

60

85

85

85

85

7487

83

79

79

79

81

79

10

10

10

10

012

8

4

4

4

6

4

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

7580

7580

7580

7580

6482

7378

6974

6974

6974

7176

6974

05

05

05

05

07

03

00

00

00

01

00

C

2

3

5

6

 

52

45

60

50

7982

8083

7881

7577

47

58

36

02

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

-7-5

7277

7378

7176

6872

02

03

01

0

D

(Part 1)

34

35

20

15

8183

8385

6

8

-7-5

-7-5

7478

7680

03

15

 

*      Noise assessment criteria for schools is 70 dB(A) between 0700~2300 during non-examination period.

**   Screening effect of topography dominates, additional benefit of temporary noise barrier not significant.

3.4.7                  When material is removed from cutting, excavation will begin at the top of existing ground level, progressing downwards until the desired invert level is reached. Then excavation will be carried out horizontally along the railway alignment. The top of the existing ground is approximately +26.0 mPD while that of the desired invert level is approximately +20.0 mPD. The equipment will be completely screened from the line of sight of the affected sensitive receivers represented by RNSRs 21, 22 and 24 one month after the excavation begins. It will remain out of sight for the next two months until excavation is completed. A 12 dB reduction is assumed, to take into account the screening effect of the topography one month into this activity.

 

3.4.8                  During viaduct alignment construction, there will also be exceedance of the ANLs at a number of NSRs in the eastern section of the alignment. However, based on experience in West Rail fFoundations, pilecap and pier construction , these activities in Spur Line are not expected to affect any one single NSR in the vianity vicinity of 13, 4, 22, 24 and 25 for more than 1 month. The noisy activities of concern care the concrete delivery and concreteing activities, including use of the vibratory poker. These activities will take place for relatively short periods during the overall construction period for the viaduct piers. Similarly, the excavation works related to widening of Lok Ma Chau Road will exceed the ANL by 5dB(A). The length of time for which this activity will impact NSR 35 is expected to be less than a month.

 

3.4.9                  From the noise assessment results, potential construction noise impacts are expected at the following RNSRs (shown in Table 3.4):. Mitigation means measures are proposed to minimize the potential impact from noisey activities and to minimize the time for which NSRs are exposed to these activities.

 

Table 3.4

RNSRs Potentially Affected by Construction Noise

 

Construction Activity

Representative Noise Sensitive Receivers Affected by Unmitigated Impact

Site Formation

19, 21

Widening of Lok Ma Chau Road

34,35

Hard material removal from Pak Shek Au Cutting

21, 22, 24

Construction of Alignment

13, 14

 

22, 24, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32

Improvement Works on Existing Sheung Shui Station and Water Mains Diversion

2, 3, 5

 

 

                 Mitigation Measures

 

3.4.10              The following direct alternative mitigation measures, as listed in Section 6 Annex 13 of the TM EIAO had beenwere considered but were found to be inappropriate for mitigating the potential construction noise impact.:

 

(a)alternative land use arrangement: the project does not involve any proposed land use change and there can be no change to planned use of the railway reserve.

 

(a)alternative siting: the railway is not a planned noise sensitive land use.

 

(a)screening by noise tolerant buildings: buildings development is not part of this Project.

 

(a)setback of buildings: construction noise impacts affect existing buildings which cannot be setback.

 

(a)decking over: buildings development is not part of this Project. Existing buildings cannot be used to deck over the proposed railway.

 

(a)Extended podium: buildings development is not part of this Project. Existing podiums cannot be used to deck over the proposed railway.

 

(a)building orientation: buildings development is not part of this Project.

 

(a)treatment of source: the Contractor is advised to use silenced or super silenced equipment when ever applicable.

 

(a)alternative alignment: this is discussed in Chapters 1 and 2 of this report.

 

(a)Noise barrier / enclosure: considered. Mobile plant.

 

(a)special buildings design: buildings development is not part of this Project.

 

(a)architectural features / balcony: buildings development is not part of this Project.

 

(a)Open-textured road surfacing: not relevant to construction noise.      

 

3.4.11              The following measures are proposed for the reduction of potential noise impact:

 

(i)        Temporary noise barriers should  be installed at active parts of construction areas where construction equipment is being operated. The barriers shall be constructed of solid material, without gaps, and of density no less than 10 kg/m². These barriers should be designed to screen all operating construction equipment from the line of sight of the RNSRs (At least 2.5 m tall). This is expected to provide a 75 dB reduction.

 

(ii)      Use of quiet equipment with proper maintenance and orientating equipment exhaust away from RNSRs.

 

(iii)     When construction works are carried out close to schools, the schools should be notified in advance. Examination periods should be avoided when construction works are carried out near schools.

 

(iv)    Reduction of powered and mechanical construction equipment as far as practicable.

 

                 Residual Impacts

 

3.4.12              The residual impacts following the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures are given in Tables 3.3 and 3.5.

 

3.4.13              During site formation, installation of a temporary noise barrier will reduce the noise level from the works to a level of 2 4 dB(A) above the acceptable criteria at RNSR 19. This exceedance will last for 2 to 3 weeks. During the first month of hard material removal from Pak Shek Au Cutting, noise assessment criteria would still be exceeded by 2dB(A) at RNSR 21, by 13 dB(A) at RNSR 22 and 57 dB(A) at RNSR 24 after installation of a temporary noise barrier. RNSRs 21, 22 and 24 represent 3 and 4a total of 810 dwellings respectively. The exceedance could last up to one month, after which the operating equipment would be screened by topography. A number of 12 dwellings will be affected by the alignment construction, however, the noisy activities considered involved in construction of foundations, pile capping and pier construction is are not likely to affect each NSR individually for more than 1 month. Three Four dwellings would be affected by noise from the widening of Lok Ma Chau Road for 2 to 3 weeks.

 

Table 3.5

Representative Noise Sensitive Receivers Affected by Residual Impact

 

Construction Activity

Representative Noise Sensitive Receivers Affected by Residual Impact

Duration of Potential Residual Impact

Site Formation

19 (24 dB(A) above criteria)

2 to 3 weeks

Hard material removal from Pak Shek Au Cutting

21, 22, 24 (13 and 57 dB(A) above criteria)

1 month

Alignment Construction

13, 14, 22, 24, 25 and 31 (1 to 7dB(A) above criteria)

Less than 1 month at each NSR

Widening of Lok Ma Chau Road

34, 35 (13 to 5 dB(A) above criteria)

2 to 3 weeks

 

 

                 Monitoring and Audit Requirements

 

3.4.14              Regular monitoring and auditing of construction noise at RNSR 19 during site formation of the adjacent temporary works area, and RNSRs 22 and 24 during hard material removal from Pak Shek Au Cutting and is recommended. Detailed requirements are given in Chapter 12. Ad-hoc monitoring and audit should also be carried out at RNSR 35 in case of complaints, and measures taken to ensure acceptable noise levels are met as far as possible.

 

                 Summary

 

3.4.15              Based on up to date information on the likely construction programme and the activities to be carried out, the potential construction noise impact was predicted. The provision of a solid temporary noise barrier of a minimum height of 2.5 m around active parts of the construction site and the reduction of noisy equipment during alignment construction are recommended to reduce potential noise impact.

 

3.4.16              Following the installation of these measures 1 kindergarten will be affected by a noise level 24 dB above noise assessment criteria for a period of 2 to 3 weeks, 7810 dwellings would be affected by hard material removal at Pak Shek Au. The construction noise impact would cause a residual impact of up to 13 to 57 dB(A) after mitigation for the first month. Thereafter the activity would be screened from sight of these receivers by topography. A number of 12 dwellings would be affected by pier construction activities up to 7 dB(A) above the ANL, however, the time period of exceedance would be less than one month, given the native nature and length of time for noisy activities. 3Four dwellings would be affected by 13 to 5 dB above assessment criteria for 2 to 3 weeks due to the widening of Lok Ma Chau Road.

 

3.4.17              Regular monitoring and audit of construction noise during hard material removal from Pak Shek Au cutting is recommended for RNSRs 22 and 24, during site formation of adjacent temporary works area monitoring is required at RNSR 19 and ad hoc monitoring and audit at RNSR 35 should be carried out if complaints arise.

 

3.5                        Operational Noise Assessment

 

3.5.1                  This section presents the methodology, sensitive receivers, relevant assessment criteria, and up to date findings on the potential operational noise impact due to Spur Line and other concurrent projects.

 

3.5.2                  Sources of potential noise impact during operation phase of Spur Line include:

 

                 (i)       railway noise, which has three major components:

 

                 • airborne noise originating from the propulsion system and wheel / rail interaction;

                 • structure radiated or re-radiated noise resulting from wheel / rail interaction which is transmitted through the viaduct structure;

                 • noise from the air conditioner on the top of the carriage.

 

(ii)      noise from fixed plant located at railway stations, such as ventilation equipment and sewage treatment works for the station, and any standby generators, and the proposed standby transformer located at the existing Fanling Station electrical transformer.

 

                 Fixed Plant Operation Noise

 

3.5.3                  The fixed and semi-fixed noise sources of the Spur Line during operation phrase include the following equipment:

 

•           Ventilation fans, dosing pumps, sewage pumps and motors from the proposed Sewage Treatment Works (STW) for the Lok Ma Chau Station.

 

•           Ventilation fans, transformers, air handling units, emergency generators and chillers of the Lok Ma Chau Station.

 

•           Standby emergency generator at the Sheung Shui Station.

 

3.5.4                  The treatment process of the STW at Lo Wu is expected to be similar to that proposed at the Lok Ma Chau Station, although the capacity of the STW at Lo Wu is greater than that of the one planned at Lok Ma Chau.

 

3.5.5                  At this stage the layout of STW, locations of generator and ventilation equipment and chillers have not been fixed. Design noise limits for each group of equipment, to meet the assessment criteria of ANLs - 5 dB(A), are proposed under this EIA.

 

3.5.6                  The RNSRs worst affected by each type of noise source listed above, their corresponding ASRs, ANLs in dB(A) and values of ANLs - 5 dB(A), and their respective distances from the future noise sources are shown in Table 3.6.

 

Table 3.6

Details of RNSRs Worst Affected by the Fixed Noise Sources Planned

Under the Spur Line Project

 

Group and Location of Fixed Sources

Worst Affected RNSRs

ASR

ANLs, dB(A) (ANLs at 23:00 to 07:00 is assumed to be limiting)

ANLs - 5, Leq (30 min) dB(A)

Slant Distance Between Worst Affected RNSRs and Fixed Noise Source, m

Proposed Sewage Treatment Works (STW)  at Lok Ma Chau Station

33

A

50

45

520

Ventilation fans, transformers, air handling units, emergency generators and chillers at Lok Ma Chau Station

33

A

50

45

520

Standby emergency generator at the Sheung Shui Station

2

B

55

50

30

 

 

3.5.7                  The design noise limits of the equipment are calculated according to standard acoustic principles. A +3 dB(A) correction is subtracted from the maximum allowable noise levels to account for facade reflection.

 

3.5.8                  Table 3.7 gives the designed noise limits as sound pressure levels measured at 1 m from any exits/entrances of the specified plant room for each group of planned fixed sources to meet the target of ANL -5 dB(A) at the worst affected NSRs .

 

Table 3.7

Designed Noise limits for Each Group of Planned Fixed Sources

 

Group and Location of Fixed Sources

Design Noise limits, dB(A)

Assumptions Made

Proposed Sewage Treatment Works (STW) at Lok Ma Chau Station

 

104

+ 3 dB(A) facade correction.

Ventilation fans, transformers, air handling units, emergency generators and chillers at Lok Ma Chau Station

 

104

+ 3 dB(A) facade correction.

Standby emergency generator at the Sheung Shui Station

 

85

+ 3 dB(A) facade correction.

 

 

                 Railway Noise Impact Assessment

 

                 Introduction

 

3.5.9                  Noise emitted from the operation of railway on an at-grade, ballasted track is dominated by the airborne noise from the propulsion system wheel / rail interaction and the roof-mounted air conditioning (A/C) system. Trains moving on viaduct will excite vibration of the viaduct structure. This vibration is then re-radiated as noise. Trains operating on railway tracks on viaduct will therefore emit structure radiated noise in addition to the two types of airborne noise mentioned above.

 

3.5.10              The noise impacts that are likely to arise from the operation of the Spur Line have been assessed using detailed prediction methodologies agreed with the Environmental Protection Department (EPD). Assessment procedures include considerations of the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process and the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG) .

 

3.5.11              The objectives of the railway noise assessment are:

 

•         to predict and evaluate the potential noise impact of railway operation at the RNSRs against railway noise assessment criteria;

•         to identify, where noise assessment criteria is exceeded, appropriate technical or operational mitigation requirements and measures for airborne and structure re-radiated noise respectively;

•         to predict and evaluate the acceptability of the residual noise impact following the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures against railway noise assessment criteria and recommendations for conditions which require consideration during detailed design stage as necessary.

 

                 Prediction Methodology

 

3.5.12              For the purpose of noise assessment, the beginning of the Spur Line is taken to be the switch points of the (future) turnouts from East Rail. The chainages of these switchpoints are CH 30660 and CH 30160 for the up and down tracks, respectively. Both tracks of the Spur line begin on short sections of ballast through the turnouts before rising onto viaducts to cross the adjacent nullah. The difference in chainages results in a short section of track (from CH 30160 to CH 30660) over which noise arises from the downtrack Spur Line train, but no noise arises for the uptrack train (as this train starts from a higher chainage). The noise assessment was carried out for all identified representative NSRs affected by Spur Line track only, from these defined chainages.  The rail track to the south of these chainages is existing East Rail and is not therefore taken into account in the Spur Line assessment.

 

3.5.13              Potential railway operation noise impact at the identified RNSRs was predicted using a methodology agreed with EPD and based on methods used in the West Rail Final EIA Report[4] and procedures in the Calculation of Railway Noise 1995 (CRN) published by the UK Department of Transport.

 

3.5.14              In terms of noise from the interaction of wheels and rails, the following factors affect the predicted noise levels:

 

•         type of rolling stock;

 

•         train speed - the rolling noise increases with train speed;

 

•         type of track and rail support structures - rolling noise levels differ as trains pass over different types of track, such as jointed or continuously welded tracks as well as structures such as bridges or viaducts.

 

3.5.15              The rail noise level at the RNSR was predicted by modelling the train as a line source. The noise level emanating from a moving train was predicted taking into account the noise attenuation due to distance, corrections for angle of view, screening effects from barriers and the facade reflection effect.

 

3.5.16              In predicting the noise from the railway, the track was divided into segments, the lengths of which are determined by factors such as train speed, curvature of the track and gradient. Each segment is then treated as a separate line source and the noise contribution from each segment is summed to obtain the predicted noise level at the RNSR. The major wayside noise component, namely airborne noise, structure radiated noise and A/C noise, were modelled separately and combined to obtain the predicted rail noise level.

 

3.5.17              Following agreement with EPD, a 20-metre segment length was adopted in the railway noise prediction. The track centre co-ordinates for both the up and down tracks of the Spur Line which were provided by KCRC at 20m intervals, were used in the prediction model.

 

3.5.18              The positions of these major noise sources along the alignment, namely airborne noise, structure radiated noise and A/C noise, as well as the top of the standard 1.2m parapet wall on the viaduct were calculated from these co-ordinates. The horizontal offsets from track centres and vertical offsets from top of rails adopted in estimating the noise source locations are tabulated in Table 3.8.

 

Table 3.8

Offsets adopted in Estimating Noise Source Location

 

Noise Source

Horizontal Offset, m

Vertical Offset, m

Outboard Plenum Gap

1.625

0.98

Inboard Plenum Gap

-1.625

0.98

Structure-radiated Noise (Standard Viaduct)

0

-2

Structure-radiated Noise (At‑grade Plenum)

0

2.08

A/C Noise

0

3.74

Standard 1.2m parapet wall

3.3

2.08

 

 

3.5.19              The maximum speed limit along the Spur Line is 100 km/h. The speed profiles for the proposed alignment (both up and down tracks) provided by KCRC were used to determine the train speed for each 20m track segment.

 

3.5.20              The source noise level in Lmax, of a train passby event at 100 km/h, 25 m from track centreline, and an elevation level with rail head was adjusted for speed, distance and angle of view, to obtain Lmax level at each RNSR. The noise contribution from each segment in terms of Equivalent Noise Level, Leq (30 min) at each RNSR, was calculated by applying barrier attenuation and façade effect correction. Source terms under different operating conditions are discussed in Section 3.5.26 to 3.5.33.

 

3.5.21              The predicted noise level at the RNSR was obtained by summing the contribution from all track segments. The railway noise calculation procedure, including equations used, is detailed in Appendix D. The reference viaduct noise spectrum used in estimating the barrier attenuation was adapted from the West Rail EIA study and is shown in Figure D.1.

 

Unmitigated Railway Noise Levels

 

Baseline Railway Operation Conditions

 

3.5.22              To determine unmitigated noise levels, it was assumed that ballasted track will be used for the at-grade sections. Low Vibration Track (LVT) is assumed on viaducts. The first Spur Line train will depart from Sheung Shui Station at 0600 hours each day and the last train from Lok Ma Chau Terminus one hour following the close of the Border Control Point.at 12:30 a.m.

 

3.5.23              The worst-case scenario in terms of railway noise assumes an ultimate train frequency of 12 unskirted trains per hour in each direction during 0700 to 2300 hours (referred to as daytime). For the restricted night time period between 2300 to 0700 hour (referred to as nighttime), the train frequency is assumed to be reduced to 6 trains per hour per direction.

 

3.5.24              The viaduct sections will be incorporated with the plenum noise reduction system, and a 1.2m parapet wall above the walkway will be part of the standard viaduct design.

 

3.5.25              As the existing East Rail refurbished trains to be operated on the Spur Line are not equipped with vehicular skirts and under-car absorption, the airborne attenuation will be provided mainly by the under-walkway (single) plenum and the parapet wall.

 

Source Noise Levels

 

Wheel / Rail Noise

 

3.5.26              The refurbished trains operating on the existing KCRC East Rail will be used on the Spur Line. As such, the train noise source term assumed in this assessment has been obtained from wayside measurements conducted by AEC on the East Rail Mid Life Refurbished EMUs. This reference (airborne) noise source level on the at grade, ballasted track section is 86.3dB(A) in LmAmax 1.2 m above the ground, at 25 m from the nearest track centreline for a 12 car transit train travelling at-grade at 100 km/h. This is applied to the section just north of the Sheung Shui Station as well as the embankment and cutting section at Kwu Tung.

 

3.5.27              On viaduct, the airborne noise reduction provided by the single plenum system was modelled using the computer ray-tracing model, "RAYNOISE Rev. 3.0" by Numerical Integration Technologies. The noise attenuation provided by the 1.2m parapet wall was estimated based on an empirical approach developed by Makaewa[5].

 

3.5.28              The numerical modelling by RAYNOISE Rev. 3.0, based on the principles of geometrical acoustics, is utilised to predict the sound field produced by the sources and model the reflection from physical structures. The ray-tracing model was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the single plenum system. Determination of the total wayside noise for the viaduct sections is detailed in Appendix C. The attenuation provided by the viaduct plenum system for receptor located at 25m from track centreline, level with top of rail, is summarized in Table 3.9.

 

Table 3.9

Attenuation provided by Single Plenum System

 

Plenum Attenuation (250 mm gap), dB(A)

Outboard Side

Inboard Side

11

11

 

 

3.5.29              The airborne source noise level for the viaduct sections with single plenum system is (Lmax) 75.3dB(A) for both the outboard and inboard side at 25m from track centreline for a train travelling at 100km/h.

Structure Radiated Noise

 

3.5.30              The structure radiated noise level of the viaduct section was provided by KCRC. The methodology used in the theoretical determination of the structure-radiated noise was detailed in the KCRC West Rail EIA Final Assessment Report.[6]

 

3.5.31              The structure radiated source noise level for the viaduct sections using Low Vibration Track (LVT) form is (Lmax) 66.5 dB(A) at 25m from track centreline for a train travelling at 100km/h (Appendix E, Table E1).

 

3.5.32              The structure radiated noise level for twin viaduct was applied for all viaduct structures along the route of the Spur Line for conservative assessment. The structure radiated noise source term was corrected to the reference speed of 100km/h for the Spur Line by assuming the variation in maximum structure radiated noise level with train speed is to follow a 25 log (speed) relationship.

 

Air-Conditioner (A/C) Noise

 

3.5.33              The source A/C noise level of East Rail vehicles was derived from measurements taken at the Air Conditioner Workshop in the Maintenance Depot for the air-conditioning units installed on the East Rail trains[7]. The sound power level of the A/C unit was determined to be 110.9dB(A) which was subsequently input to the computer ray-tracing model, "RAYNOISE Rev. 3.0". The A/C source noise level was determined to be (Lmax) 62.8dB(A) at 25m from track centreline. KCRC confirmed that West Rail trains have a source A/C noise level of 57 dB(A) (Lmax) at 15 m from track centreline.

 

3.5.34              A complete set of noise source terms used in the prediction of railway noise from Spur Line is shown in Appendix E. The unmitigated noise levels were predicted based on the standard viaduct design (walkway plenum, 1.2m parapet wall) with Low Vibration Trackform.

 

Predicted Unmitigated Noise Levels

 

3.5.35              The unmitigated noise levels were predicted based on the standard viaduct design (walkway plenum, 1.2m parapet wall) with Low Vibration Trackform. Comparison of the unmitigated noise levels in Leq (30minutes) at the RNSRs with the daytime and nighttime noise assessment criteria are given in Tables 3.10 and 3.11 respectively.

 

3.5.36              Within the at-grade section at Sheung Shui, unmitigated noise levels at RNSR 6 exceeds the respective daytime assessment criteria, and night time criteria are exceeded at RNSRs 6 to 8 and 10 to 12. These RNSRs are affected by the railway noise from the at-grade ballasted track section north of Sheung Shui Station. The criteria were exceeded mainly due to the higher air borne noise emitted as trains pass the points and crossings just north of the existing Sheung Shui Station.

 

3.5.37              On the viaduct section, predicted unmitigated noise levels at RNSRs 13 and 14 exceed the daytime noise criteria. Night time criteria were exceeded at RNSRs 13 to 19. The Area Sensitivity Rating at these RNSRs is mostly ‘A’. These RNSRs are affected by potential noise from train movements on the viaduct section. Both airborne noise and structure radiated noise are significant causes of noise exceedance.

 

3.5.38              The highest noise levels for both daytime and night time are found at RNSRs 21 to 27 at Kwu Tung, where the RNSRs are situated close to the at grade embankment / cutting section of the alignment. Airborne noise is the only significant component of the potential noise impact for these locations. The exceedance is mainly due to the very short horizontal distances between the railway and these RNSRs. At the worst affected receiver, RNSR 25, the unmitigated LAeq (30minutes) is 76dB(A).

 

3.5.39              At RNSRs 28 to 33 along the viaduct leading towards the Lok Ma Chau Station, unmitigated noise levels are mostly below their respective daytime assessment criteria except for 2dB(A) exceedance at RNSR 28 and 1 dB(A) exceedance at RNSR 29. The night time unmitigated noise levels, however, were exceeded at all of these RNSRs.

 

 

Table 3.10

Comparison of the Unmitigated Noise Levels for Railway Operation

between 0700~2300 hours and the Noise Assessment Criteria

 

RNSR

Receiver Setback Distance (m)

Unmitigated Noise Level, LAeq (30 minutes) dB(A)

Between 0700~2300

Noise Assessment Criteria for

0700 – 2300 hours, LAeq (30 minutes) dB(A)

Exceedance of Acceptable Noise Level, dB(A)

0700 – 2300 hours

Up Track

Down Track

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

264

265

49

65

0

2-1

145

144

50

65

0

2-2

147

145

50

65

0

2-3

153

152

50

65

0

3-1

81

84

51

65

0

3-2

74

77

51

65

0

3-3

81

83

Negligible*

65

0

4

218

214

Negligible

65

0

5

63

67

55

65

0

6-1

59

55

67

65

2

6-2

58

54

65

65

0

6-3

93

90

Negligible

65

0

7-1

112

116

62

65

0

7-2

105

109

62

65

0

8

263

252

59

65

0

9-1

154

164

61

70

0

9-2

147

157

62

70

0

10-1

249

260

60

65

0

10-2

249

260

59

65

0

11

376

394

59

60

0

12-1

388

409

57

60

0

12-2

394

416

58

60

0

13-1

22

28

64

60

4

13-2

15

19

62

60

2

14-1

22

27

63

60

3

14-2

24

29

62

60

2

15-1

189

184

59

60

0

15-2

193

188

57

60

0

16

72

67

61

65

0

17-1

25

29

63

65

0

17-2

23

28

62

65

0

18-1

32

26

63

65

0

18-2

36

32

61

65

0

19-1

67

71

63

65

0

19-2

68

73

63

65

0

21-1

71

67

71

65

6

21-2

69

64

72

65

7

22-1

32

36

75

65

10

22-2

36

40

73

65

8

23-1

72

77

71

65

6

23-2

89

94

71

65

6

24-1

27

32

75

65

10

24-2

23

28

76

65

11

25-1

27

22

76

60

16

25-2

15

10

74

60

14

26

96

101

70

60

10

27

45

41

73

60

13

28

59

54

62

60

2

29-1

64

60

61

60

1

29-2

68

63

61

60

1

30-1

67

62

59

60

0

30-2

67

62

59

60

0

31-1

48

43

57

60

0

31-2

44

40

59

60

0

32-1

63

58

56

60

0

32-2

59

54

58

60

0

33

115

111

58

60

0

 

*      Negligible indicates that this facade has no angle of view towards Spur Line and therefore does not contribute to the total noise level. These NSR facades were selected for the assessment of cumulative noise impacts (see Section on Cumulative Noise Impacts).

 

 

Table 3.11

Comparison of the Unmitigated Noise Levels for Railway Operation

between 2300~0700 hours and the Noise Assessment Criteria

 

 

RNSR

Receiver Setback Distance (m)

Unmitigated Noise Level, LAeq (30 minutes)

dB(A)

Between 2300~0700

Noise Assessment Criteria, for

2300 – 0700 hours

LAeq (30 minutes) dB(A)

Exceedance of Acceptable Noise Level, dB(A)

2300 - 0700 hours

Up Track

Down Track

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

264

265

46

55

0

2-1

145

144

47

55

0

2-2

147

145

47

55

0

2-3

153

152

47

55

0

3-1

81

84

48

55

0

3-2

74

77

48

55

0

3-3

81

83

Negligible*

55

0

4

218

214

Negligible

55

0

5

63

67

52

55

0

6-1

59

55

64

55

9

6-2

58

54

62

55

7

6-3

93

90

Negligible

55

0

7-1

112

116

59

55

4

7-2

105

109

59

55

4

8

263

252

56

55

1

9-1

154

164

58

60

0

9-2

147

157

59

60

0

10-1

249

260

57

55

2

10-2

249

260

56

55

1

11

376

394

56

50

6

12-1

388

409

54

50

4

12-2

394

416

55

50

5

13-1

22

28

61

50

6

13-2

15

19

59

50

9

14-1

22

27

60

50

10

14-2

24

29

60

50

10

15-1

189

184

56

50

6

15-2

193

188

54

50

4

16

72

67

58

55

3

17-1

25

29

60

55

5

17-2

23

28

59

55

4

18-1

32

26

60

55

5

18-2

36

32

58

55

3

19-1

67

71

60

55

5

19-2

68

73

60

55

5

21-1

71

67

68

55

13

21-2

69

64

69

55

14

22-1

32

36

72

55

17

22-2

36

40

70

55

15

23-1

72

77

68

55

13

23-2

89

94

68

55

13

24-1

27

32

72

55

17

24-2

23

28

73

55

18

25-1

27

22

73

50

23

25-2

15

10

71

50

21

26

96

101

67

50

17

27

45

41

70

50

20

28

59

54

59

50

9

29-1

64

60

58

50

8

29-2

68

63

58

50

8

30-1

67

62

56

50

6

30-2

67

62

56

50

6

31-1

48

43

54

50

4

31-2

44

40

56

50

6

32-1

63

58

53

50

3

32-2

59

54

55

50

5

33

115

111

55

50

5

 

*      Negligible indicates that this facade has no angle of view towards Spur Line and therefore does not contribute to the total noise level. These NSR facades were selected for the assessment of cumulative noise impacts (see Section on Cumulative Noise Impacts).

 

3.5.40              The unmitigated Lmax level at the RNSRs are compared against the HKPSG noise criterion as tabulated in Table 3.12. Only at RNSRs 22, 24 and 25 are the HKPSG standards exceeded.

 

Table 3.12

Comparison of the Unmitigated Levels

with Noise Assessment Criteria for LAmax

 

RNSR

Receiver Setback Distance (m)

Maximum Predicted Noise Level, LAmax (30 minutes),

 dB(A)

Exceedance of L Amax  Criterion  of  85dB(A) for 2300-0700 hours

Up Track

Down Track

 

 

 

 

 

1

264

265

50

0

2-1

145

144

53

0

2-2

147

145

53

0

2-3

153

152

53

0

3-1

81

84

54

0

3-2

74

77

54

0

3-3

81

83

Negligible*

-

4

218

214

Negligible

-

5

63

67

60

0

6-1

59

55

75

0

6-2

58

54

74

0

6-3

93

90

Negligible

-

7-1

112

116

69

0

7-2

105

109

70

0

8

263

252

65

0

9-1

154

164

69

0

9-2

147

157

69

0

10-1

249

260

65

0

10-2

249

260

65

0

11

376

394

64

0

12-1

388

409

63

0

12-2

394

416

64

0

13-1

22

28

75

0

13-2

15

19

72

0

14-1

22

27

73

0

14-2

24

29

73

0

15-1

189

184

66

0

15-2

193

188

65

0

16

72

67

70

0

17-1

25

29

73

0

17-2

23

28

73

0

18-1

32

26

73

0

18-2

36

32

72

0

19-1

67

71

72

0

19-2

68

73

73

0

21-1

71

67

81

0

21-2

69

64

82

0

22-1

32

36

86

1

22-2

36

40

84

0

23-1

72

77

81

0

23-2

89

94

80

0

24-1

27

32

86

1

24-2

23

28

87

2

25-1

27

22

87

2

25-2

15

10

85

0

26

96

101

80

0

27

45

41

84

0

28

59

54

72

0

29-1

64

60

71

0

29-2

68

63

70

0

30-1

67

62

68

0

30-2

67

62

68

0

31-1

48

43

66

0

31-2

44

40

67

0

32-1

63

58

65

0

32-2

59

54

66

0

33

115

111

65

0

 

·           *   Negligible indicates that this facade has no angle of view towards Spur Line and therefore does not contribute to the total noise level. These NSR facades were selected for the assessment of cumulative noise impacts (see Section on Cumulative Noise Impacts).

 

 

 

3.5.41              Details of the breakdown of unmitigated noise levels for each RNSR are given in Appendix E.

 

                        Proposed Mitigation Measures and Residual Noise Impact

 

3.5.42              To mitigate the potential railway noise impact, KCRC is committed to the following mitigation:

 

•           KCRC will adopt the multi-plenum system developed for West Rail on the viaduct section. In addition, track-forms will include the use of Floating Slab Track (FST), Low Vibration Track (LVT) and resilient base plates as appropriate. In areas where there is potential for development, i.e. Kwu Tung SGA, viaduct design will allow for the provision of additional noise mitigation measures, if necessary. On the at-grade section, KCRC will adopt the single-plenum system with ballasted track. In the future, if development proposals require it, additional noise mitigation measures could be retrofitted.

 

3.5.43              By committing to these measures for the operation hours most sensitive to noise, a similar level of noise attenuation will be achieved on the Spur Line as on West Rail.

 

                 At Grade, Ballasted Track Just North of Sheung Shui Station

 

3.5.44              A full noise enclosure is proposed at a Chainage of approximately 30+024 to 30+184. Sound absorption treatment on the interior surface of the enclosure will be required to prevent reverberant noise breakout from tunnel portals.

 

3.5.45              A 200 m long, 2 m tall sound absorptive track side noise barrier at the up track side, 4.5 m from the track centreline, is proposed between Chainage 30+680 and 30+880, to provide additional screening of the airborne noise for RNSRs 11 and 12. The height of this proposed barrier is measured from the future ground level. This section of the alignment is located on a slope climbing from the at grade section just north of the Sheung Shui Station towards the viaduct section.

 

3.5.46              Figure 3.1 (1 and 2 of 5) presents the locations of the proposed enclosure and the noise barrier.

 

Viaduct Section

 

3.5.47              FST will be adopted on the viaduct section from Sheung Shui to the beginning of the cutting/embankment section at Kwu Tung to reduce the vibration transmitted to the viaduct structure, thereby mitigating the structure-radiated noise so as to achieve wayside noise compliance. This will ensure the structure radiated noise level will not affect potential developments within Kwu Tung SGA.

 

3.5.48              LVT will be adopted on the viaduct section from the end of the cutting/embankment section at Kwu Tung to the Lok Ma Chau Terminus. Based on the planned village and conservation area land uses, this level of mitigation will be sufficient for potential future development between Pak Shek Au and Lok Ma Chau Terminus. Details of the performance of LVT are provided in Appendix E.

 

3.5.49              To mitigate airborne noise, a standard viaduct design with a parapet extending to 1.2 m above safety walkway will be adopted for all viaduct sections. This feature will enable the incorporation of the multi-plenum noise reduction system.

 

                 At Grade, Embankment and Cutting Section

 

3.5.50              Near Kwu Tung area, due to the close proximity of the track from RNSRs 21 to 27, airborne noise is predicted to be responsible for the exceedance of daytime and nighttime noise assessment criteria.

 

3.5.51              The standard walkway deck structure which allows the incorporation of a sound reduction single plenum system is proposed along all of the at-grade, cutting / embankment section of the Spur Line alignment, between Chainages 33+050 to 34+660.

 

3.5.52              Since this section of the alignment is entirely at-grade, structure radiated noise is negligible. As a result there are no design constraints on track form at this section in terms of noise criteria compliance. Where ballasted track is retained, the incorporation of a walkway deck must take into consideration maintenance requirements of the ballast.

 

                 Prediction of Mitigated Noise Level

 

3.5.53              The following sections describe the conditions under which the mitigated noise levels (residual noise impact) have been calculated.

 

                 Operation Between 0700 ~ 2300

 

•           twelve East Rail refurbished, un-skirted trains will be operated in each direction per hour. Top speed is 100 km/h;

 

•           the noise source terms with respect to A/C noise is  62.8 dB(A) as an Lmax at 25m from track centreline;

•           noise source terms for ballasted track (airborne only) just north of Sheung Shui Station is 86.3dB(A) in Lmax at 25m from track centreline for a train travelling at 100km/h;

•           structure radiated noise source term for all viaduct sections after installation of FST is 58.5dB(A) as an Lmax at 25m from track centreline for a train travelling at 100km/h, assuming a baseplate static stiffness of 13kN/mm;

•           airborne noise source term for all viaduct sections with single noise reduction plenum associated with un-skirted trains is 75.3dB(A) (Lmax) for both the inboard and the outboard at 25m from track centreline for a train travelling at 100km/h.

 

                      Operation Between 0600 ~ 0700 and After 2300

 

•           six skirted trains will be operated in each direction per hour. Top speed is also 100 km/h;

•           the noise source terms with respect to A/C noise is  57 dB(A) as an Lmax at 15 m from track centreline;

•           noise source terms for ballasted track (airborne only) just north of Sheung Shui Station is 80.6 dB(A)*. 80.6dB(A) was derived from a sense source term of 82.1 dB(A) for the new KCRC transit trains, and the addition of a skirt along the length of the car as part of the multi-pleasure plenum noise alternation attenuation system. More details are provided in Appendix E as an Lmax at 25m from track centreline for a train travelling at 100 km/h;

•           structure radiated noise source term for all viaduct sections after installation of FST is 58.5dB(A) as an Lmax at 25m from track centreline for a train travelling at 100km/h, assuming a baseplate static stiffness of 13kN/mm;

•           airborne noise source term for all viaduct sections with the multi-plenum noise reduction system associated with skirted trains is 69.0 dB(A) (Lmax) at 25m from track centreline for a train travelling at 100km/h for both the outboard side and the inboard side.

 

* 80.6 dB(A) was derived from a sense source term of 82.1 dB(A) for the new KCRC transit trains, and the addition of a skirt along the length of the car as part of the multi-plenum noise alternation attenuation system. More details are provided in Appendix E.

 

                 It should be noted that the criterion for six skirted trains during the first hour of operation (0600 to 0700) was used of the purposes of this assessment. This provides sufficient noise reduction at RNSRs to meet the NCO criteria. Consideration is being given to the cost-effectiveness of adding additional mitigation in certain key sections of the alignment, to allow the use of unskirted trains during this hour and still meet NCO criteria.

 

                 Further breakdowns of source terms levels under different types of operating conditions are given in Appendix E.

 

3.5.54              With the incorporation of the above mitigation measures, the predicted mitigated noise levels predicted at all RNSRs were below their respective daytime noise assessment criteria. The mitigated daytime noise levels at the RNSRs are compared against their respective noise assessment criteria in Table 3.13.

 

Table 3.13

Comparison of the Mitigated Noise Levels for Railway Operation

between 0700~2300 hours and the Noise Assessment Criteria

 

RNSR

Receiver Setback Distance (m)

Maximum Predicted Noise Level, dB(A)

LAeq (30 minutes)

Noise Assessment Criteria, for

0700 – 2300 hours

LAeq (30 minutes) dB(A)

Exceedance of Acceptable Noise Level, dB(A)

0700 – 2300 hours

Up Track

Down Track

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

264

265

43

65

0

2-1

145

144

44

65

0

2-2

147

145

44

65

0

2-3

153

152

44

65

0

3-1

81

84

46

65

0

3-2

74

77

46

65

0

3-3

81

83

Negligible*

65

0

4

218

214

Negligible

65

0

5

63

67

50

65

0

6-1

59

55

61

65

0

6-2

58

54

58

65

0

6-3

93

90

Negligible

65

0

7-1

112

116

57

65

0

7-2

105

109

58

65

0

8

263

252

57

65

0

9-1

154

164

60

70

0

9-2

147

157

60

70

0

10-1

249

260

58

65

0

10-2

249

260

57

65

0

11

376

394

57

60

0

12-1

388

409

54

60

0

12-2

394

416

56

60

0

13-1

22

28

58

60

0

13-2

15

19

56

60

0

14-1

22

27

51

60

0

14-2

24

29

53

60

0

15-1

189

184

49

60

0

15-2

193

188

48

60

0

16

72

67

50

65

0

17-1

25

29

51

65

0

17-2

23

28

51

65

0

18-1

32

26

51

65

0

18-2

36

32

50

65

0

19-1

67

71

50

65

0

19-2

68

73

51

65

0

21-1

71

67

48

65

0

21-2

69

64

49

65

0

22-1

32

36

52

65

0

22-2

36

40

50

65

0

23-1

72

77

51

65

0

 

Table 3.13 (cont’d)

Comparison of the Mitigated Noise Levels for Railway Operation

between 0700~2300 hours and the Noise Assessment Criteria

 

RNSR

Receiver Setback Distance (m)

Maximum Predicted Noise Level, dB(A)

LAeq (30 minutes)

Noise Assessment Criteria, for

0700 – 2300 hours

LAeq (30 minutes) dB(A)

Exceedance of Acceptable Noise Level, dB(A)

0700 – 2300 hours

Up Track

Down Track

 

 

 

 

 

 

23-2

89

94

51

65

0

24-1

27

32

52

65

0

24-2

23

28

53

65

0

25-1

27

22

52

60

0

25-2

15

10

50

60

0

26

96

101

49

60

0

27

45

41

51

60

0

28

59

54

55

60

0

29-1

64

60

54

60

0

29-2

68

63

54

60

0

30-1

67

62

54

60

0

30-2

67

62

53

60

0

31-1

48

43

52

60

0

31-2

44

40

53

60

0

32-1

63

58

51

60

0

32-2

59

54

52

60

0

33

115

111

51

60

0

 

*      Negligible indicates that this facade has no angle of view towards Spur Line and therefore does not contribute to the total noise level. These NSR facades were selected for the assessment of cumulative noise impacts (see Section on Cumulative Noise Impacts).

 

 

3.5.55              For nighttime operation, the mitigated nighttime noise levels at each RNSR are compared against their respective noise assessment criteria as shown in Table 3.14. The mitigated Leq (30 minute) noise levels are below their respective noise assessment criteria at all receivers.

 

 

Table 3.14

Comparison of the Mitigated Noise Levels for Railway Operation

between 2300~0700 hours and the Noise Assessment Criteria

 

RNSR

Receiver Setback Distance (m)

Mitigated Noise Level, dB(A)

LAeq (30 minutes) between 2300~0700 hours

Noise Assessment Criteria, for

2300 - 0700 hours

LAeq (30 minutes) dB(A)

Exceedance of Acceptable Noise Level, dB(A)

2300 – 0700 hours

Up Track

Down Track

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

264

265

35

55

0

2-1

145

144

38

55

0

2-2

147

145

38

55

0

2-3

153

152

38

55

0

3-1

81

84

38

55

0

3-2

74

77

37

55

0

3-3

81

83

Negligible*

55

0

4

218

214

Negligible

55

0

5

63

67

41

55

0

6-1

59

55

49

55

0

6-2

58

54

46

55

0

6-3

93

90

Negligible

55

0

7-1

112

116

49

55

0

7-2

105

109

49

55

0

8

263

252

48

55

0

9-1

154

164

51

60

0

9-2

147

157

52

60

0

10-1

249

260

49

55

0

10-2

249

260

49

55

0

11

376

394

48

50

0

12-1

388

409

46

50

0

12-2

394

416

47

50

0

13-1

22

28

49

50

0

13-2

15

19

47

50

0

14-1

22

27

45

50

0

14-2

24

29

47

50

0

15-1

189

184

41

50

0

15-2

193

188

40

50

0

16

72

67

43

55

0

17-1

25

29

46

55

0

17-2

23

28

45

55

0

18-1

32

26

45

55

0

18-2

36

32

44

55

0

19-1

67

71

43

55

0

19-2

68

73

44

55

0

21-1

71

67

40

55

0

21-2

69

64

41

55

0

22-1

32

36

43

55

0

Table 3.14 (Cont’d)

Comparison of the Mitigated Noise Levels for Railway Operation

between 2300~0700 hours and the Noise Assessment Criteria

 

RNSR

Receiver Setback Distance (m)

Mitigated Noise Level, dB(A)

LAeq (30 minutes) between 2300~0700 hours

Noise Assessment Criteria, for

2300 - 0700 hours

LAeq (30 minutes) dB(A)

Exceedance of Acceptable Noise Level, dB(A)

2300 – 0700 hours

Up Track

Down Track

 

 

 

 

 

 

22-2

36

40

42

55

0

23-1

72

77

42

55

0

23-2

89

94

43

55

0

24-1

27

32

43

55

0

24-2

23

28

45

55

0

25-1

27

22

43

50

0

26

96

101

41

50

0

27

45

41

43

50

0

28

59

54

50

50

0

29-1

64

60

50

50

0

29-2

68

63

49

50

0

30-1

67

62

50

50

0

30-2

67

62

49

50

0

31-1

48

43

48

50

0

31-2

44

40

49

50

0

32-1

63

58

47

50

0

32-2

59

54

48

50

0

33

115

111

46

50

0

 

*      Negligible indicates that this facade has no angle of view towards Spur Line and therefore does not contribute to the total noise level. These NSR facades were selected for the assessment of cumulative noise impacts (see Section on Cumulative Noise Impacts).

 

 

3.5.56              With the proposed mitigation incorporated, the mitigated Lmax levels at all RNSRs are within the noise criterion of 85dB(A) as an Lmax for railway noise between 2300~0700. The mitigated Lmax levels are compared with the criterion in Table 3.15.

 

Table 3.15

Comparison of the Mitigated Levels (LAmax) for Railway Operation

between 2300~0700 hours with Noise Assessment Criterion

 

RNSR

Receiver Setback Distance (m)

Mitigated LAmax Level,

dB(A)

Operation Between 2300~0700

Exceed 85 dB(A) in LAmax By:

(dB(A))

Up Track

Down Track

 

 

 

 

 

1

264

265

41

0

2-1

145

144

44

0

2-2

147

145

44

0

2-3

153

152

44

0

3-1

81

84

45

0

3-2

74

77

44

0

3-3

81

83

Negligible*

0

4

218

214

Negligible

0

5

63

67

50

0

6-1

59

55

61

0

6-2

58

54

58

0

6-3

93

90

Negligible

0

7-1

112

116

59

0

7-2

105

109

60

0

8

263

252

58

0

9-1

154

164

61

0

9-2

147

157

62

0

10-1

249

260

58

0

10-2

249

260

58

0

11

376

394

56

0

12-1

388

409

55

0

12-2

394

416

56

0

13-1

22

28

63

0

13-2

15

19

60

0

14-1

22

27

59

0

14-2

24

29

60

0

15-1

189

184

51

0

15-2

193

188

50

0

16

72

67

56

0

17-1

25

29

60

0

17-2

23

28

60

0

18-1

32

26

59

0

18-2

36

32

58

0

19-1

67

71

56

0

19-2

68

73

56

0

21-1

71

67

52

0

 

 

Table 3.15 (Cont’d)

Comparison of the Mitigated Levels (LAmax) for Railway Operation

between 2300~0700 hours with Noise Assessment Criterion

 

RNSR

Receiver Setback Distance (m)

Mitigated LAmax Level,

dB(A)

Operation Between 2300~0700

Exceed 85 dB(A) in LAmax By:

(dB(A))

Up Track

Down Track

 

 

 

 

 

21-2

69

64

53

0

22-1

32

36

57

0

22-2

36

40

55

0

23-1

72

77

55

0

23-2

89

94

55

0

24-1

27

32

56

0

24-2

23

28

58

0

25-1

27

22

57

0

25-2

15

10

55

0

26

96

101

52

0

27

45

41

56

0

28

59

54

64

0

29-1

64

60

63

0

29-2

68

63

62

0

30-1

67

62

63

0

30-2

67

62

62

0

31-1

48

43

61

0

31-2

44

40

62

0

32-1

63

58

59

0

32-2

59

54

60

0

33

115

111

57

0

 

              *          Negligible indicates that this facade has no angle of view towards Spur Line and therefore does not contribute to the total noise level. These NSR facades were selected for the assessment of cumulative noise impacts (see Section on Cumulative Noise Impacts).

 

 

3.5.57              Detailed railway noise prediction results for all RNSRs are given in Appendix E.

 

                 Provisions for Planning Noise Sensitive Land Uses in Future

 

3.5.58              The mitigation measures described in the above sections are sufficient for the reduction of the potential railway noise impact to an acceptable level, at all the existing and confirmed future noise sensitive receivers currently known within the EIA Study Area.

 

 

3.5.59              In line with the commitment given to Government by KCRC, the railway and viaduct structure will be designed with provision for additional noise mitigation, if necessary, in future potential development areas.

 

3.5.60              This section provides estimates of noise impacts from KCRC Spur Line train operations on the planned high-rise residential property development located within the Kwu Tung North SGA at the minimum setback provided by the Consultants of the Planning Department and Territory Development Department. The currently proposed location and layout of the Kwu Tung North SGA is shown in Figure 3.2. According to the information provided, high rise structures will be located no closer than 10 m setback on the north side and 35 m setback on the south side of the railway reserve, which is 84 m wide, centred on the midline of the planned Spur Line alignment throughout the SGA.  This indicates a minimum setback of 52 m to the residential towers measured from the viaduct centre.  The building heights are assumed to have a maximum height of 140 m (43 storeys), including podium heights. The height from ground to top of rail is assumed to be 7 m.

 

3.5.61              At this setback, the wayside noise level, where there is line of sight from the plenum gap (between the walkways and the train) and the receiver located in the residential tower, is completely determined by airborne noise.  The structure borne and A/C noise are low enough relative to the airborne noise to allow these nosie sources to be neglected.  The minimum distance between source and receiver located along line of sight is 54 m for the far track and 57 m for the near track.  Assuming two simultaneous (skirted) train passbys at 76 kph, and these minimum distances, an upper bound for the expected noise level (LAeq30) obtained for either the at-grade or viaduct track sections is 55 dB(A).  The calculation is summarised in Table 3.16 below.

 

Table 3.167

Calculation of the Maximum Noise Impact on Receivers located

in high rise residential towers located at the minimum setback of 10 m

outside the Railway Reserve

 

 

FORMULA/COMMENT

NEAR TRACK

dB(A)

FAR TRACK

dB(A)

AIRBORNE SOURCE LEVEL

AT 100 kph AND 25 m SETBACK

69

69

DISTANCE CORRECTION

10Log(d/25);

d = 54 m FAR TRACK,

d = 57 m NEAR TRACK

-3.6

-3.3

SPEED CORRECTION

30Log(76/100)

-3.6

-3.6

CORRECTION FROM LAmax to LAeq30

6 TRAINS PER HOUR PER DIRECTION

-13

-13

FAÇADE CORRECTION

---

3

3

WAYSIDE NOISE LEVEL FROM EACH TRAIN

(LAeq30)

---

51.8

52.1

3.5.62              As the SGA will have an Area Sensitivity Rating B, the night time maximum allowable noise limit (LAeq30) is 55 dB(A). Therefore, assuming a maximum speed of 76 kph along the track adjacent to the SGA, no additional mitigation beyond that already specified will be required to satisfy the NCO requirement.

 

3.5.63              As a worst case scenario, if development was carried out (contrary to the minimum setback and maximum building height proposed by the Planning Department) so that residential towers were to be placed at the boundary of the railway reserve, the minimum setback between source and receiver would be reduced by 10m. Compliance with the night time maximum allowable noise limit (LAeq30) of 55 dB(A) could then be achieved by one of two measures:

 

1.      Further reduction of maximum speed on the track adjacent to the SGA to 71 kph with no additional mitigation beyond that already specified; or

 

2.      No restriction on train speed (up to 90 kph) but additional edge wall barriers, up to full enclosure, placed atop the parapet between the train tracks and the noise sensitive receiver, with sufficient height to block line-of-sight between the under walkway plenum gap (near track only) and the receiver.

 

3.5.64              Similar to the situation described above, an area south of the railway track has recently been zoned CDA and is included in the latest OZP. The location of the nearest block is the same distance from the railway reserve as quoted above (10m from the railway reserve, 52m from the centre line of the track) and the maximum height of the blocks will be similar to that quoted for the SGA (140m including the podium). The noise levels for the worst care scenario will be similar to those calculated for the SGA, although this location has the advantage of being at-grade ballast which will provide additional noise alternation attenuation through ballast absorption. Similar mitigation measures are recommended as for the SGA i.e. a reduction in train speed in this section of the alignment, to achieve the nighttime NCO criteria of 55 dB(A).

 

                 Cumulative Impacts

 

3.5.65              The significance of cumulative noise impacts from Spur Line and East Rail train operations were evaluated. The same principles were assumed in the rail noise calculation, as for the Spur Line noise assessment.  As night-time has the strictest noise criteria, night-time noise levels were calculated for

 

(i)        spur Line with and without mitigation;

(ii)      existing East Rail noises levels; and

(iii)     for the reduced noise levels expected for East Rail as a result of Spur Line mitigation.

 

3.5.66              The number of trains operated on the Spur Line during nighttime hours is 6 per direction per hour (as used in calculation of the Spur Line noise levels earlier). For the cumulative noise level calculation, an additional 6 trains per direction per hour travelling on East Rail from Sheung Shui to Lo Wu were included. As described previously, the start of the Spur Line is taken to be the start of the ballasted section incorporating the two turnouts for the up and down tracks. South of the downtrack turnout (CH 30160), a total of 12 East Rail trains will be travelling per direction per hour on ballasted track.  These trains are unskirted and have a noise source term of 86.3dB(A)).

 

3.5.67              Between the turnout for the down track and the turnout for the up track (the stretch of track between CH 30160 and 30660), the combination of trains will change. Along this section of track, there are 3 tracks. Of the 12 trains per direction per hour travelling on the track (i.e. 24 trains in total), 12 trains will be travelling on the western most track (6 going to Lo Wu and 6 going onto the up track of Spur Line (skirted)), 6 trains will be on the middle tack (coming from Lo Wu) and 6 (skirted) trains will be Spur Line trains, coming towards Sheung Shui station on the down track of the Spur Line. Spur Line trains will be skirted and have a corresponding noise source term on ballasted track of 80.6dB(A).

 

3.5.68              At CH 30660, where the turnout for the up track for the Spur Line starts, the combination of trains changes to 6 Spur Line skirted trains on viaduct and 6 unskirted East Rail trains on ballast.

 

3.5.69              These criteria were used in modeling the noise levels at selected worst case NSRs, which would be impacted to the greatest extent by East Rail, Spur Line or a combination of both.  The calculated noise levels for Spur Line train operation (with and without proposed mitigation) and East Rail noise levels (without Spur Line i.e. existing conditions, and with the mitigation proposed for Spur Line) are shown in the table below.

 

 

Table 3.178

Summary of Cumulative Impact Results

Reduction in East Rail Noise Levels due to Spur Line and

Relative Impact of East Rail and Spur Line on Cumulative Noise Levels

(Night-time Noise Levels)

 

RNSR ID

Existing East Rail

Mitigated East Rail

Mitigated Spur Line

Difference between Cumulative Noise (East Rail & Spur Line, both mitigated) and Mitigated East Rail

Difference between Mitigated East Rail and Existing East Rail

1

70

67

35

0.0

-3

2,1

66

64

38

0.0

-2

2,2

68

66

38

0.0

-2

2,3

68

66

38

0.0

-2

3,1

59

55

38

0.1

-4

Table 3.187 (Cont’d)

Summary of Cumulative Impact Results

Reduction in East Rail Noise Levels due to Spur Line and

Relative Impact of East Rail and Spur Line on Cumulative Noise Levels

(Night-time Noise Levels)

 

RNSR ID

Existing East Rail

Mitigated East Rail

Mitigated Spur Line

Difference between Cumulative Noise (East Rail & Spur Line, both mitigated) and Mitigated East Rail

Difference between Mitigated East Rail and Existing East Rail

3,2

65

63

37

0.0

-2

3,3

66

64

Negligible

0.0

-2

4

59

57

Negligible

0.0

-2

5

66

60

41

0.1

-6

6,1

70

61

49

0.3

-10

6,2

71

58

46

0.3

-13

6,3

63

51

Negligible

0.0

-11

7,1

67

58

49

0.5

-9

7,2

67

58

49

0.6

-10

8

64

61

48

0.3

-3

9,1

65

61

51

0.4

-4

9,2

66

62

52

0.3

-4

10,1

64

62

49

0.2

-3

10,2

64

62

49

0.2

-3

11

64

62

48

0.2

-2

12,1

64

62

47

0.2

-2

12,2

62

60

46

0.2

-3

13,1

66

64

47

0.1

-3

13,2

66

63

49

0.2

-3

14,1

62

60

47

0.2

-3

14,2

60

57

45

0.3

-3

15,1

53

51

41

0.5

-3

15,2

57

54

40

0.2

-3

 

Notes:     (1)     All values are LAeq (30 minutes)

                (2)      Existing East Rail is in the absence of Spur Line

                (3)      Mitigated East Rail is with Spur Line mitigation (enclosure and barrier) implemented

                (4)      Mitigated Spur Line is with mitigation (enclosure and barrier) in place to meet NCO requirements

                (5)      Cumulative Noise is mitigated East Rail and mitigated Spur Line summed.  In subtracting mitigated East Rail, the relative contribution of Spur Line to the Cumulative Noise Level is shown.

                (6)      Subtracting mitigated East Rail from Existing East Rail shows the reduction in noise levels due to Spur Line mitigation

                (7)      Negligible indicates that this facade has no angle of view towards Spur Line and therefore does not contribute to the total noise level. These NSR facades were selected for the assessment of cumulative noise impacts (see Section on Cumulative Noise Impacts).

 

 

3.5.70Three main conclusions are drawn from the results of the cumulative impacts assessment.

 

1. The existing East Rail operation noise level is much higher than the noise level achieved for the Spur Line operation. For several of the NSRs, the difference between the mitigated Spur line noise level and the existing East Rail operational noise level is over 10dB(A)

 

2. Given the large difference between the noise levels for the Spur Line and existing East Rail trains, any additional mitigation proposed for the Spur Line would not produce a perceptible change in the cumulative noise level.

 

3. The mitigation measures that have been proposed for the Spur Line have a positive effect on reducing the noise level for the existing East Rail trains. For example, at NSR5, the noise level contributed by the existing East Rail operation is 66dB(A).  This is reduced to 60dB(A) through the incorporation of the noise enclosure to cover the turnout north of Sheung Shui station, implemented as part of the Spur Line scheme.

 

3.5.71              In summary, the implementation of mitigation under the Spur Line scheme has a positive effect on reducing noise levels for the existing East Rail train operation and the maximum mitigation has been incorporated in the Spur Line design to minimize cumulative impacts.

 

                 Summary

 

3.5.72              Based on noise levels of East Rail refurbished trains, ultimate railway operation frequency, ballasted track for at grade section and LVT for viaduct section, unmitigated noise levels due to the railway operation of the Spur Line were predicted for each RNSR. For the at grade section, wheel /rail and A/C noise are the main components of potential airborne noise.

 

3.5.73              The daytime and nighttime noise assessment criteria were exceeded at many of these RNSRs due to their location close to the railway alignment, and the predominance of rural or semi-rural environment in the Study Area, which leads to an ASR associated with the most stringent noise criteria for railway noise.

 

3.5.74              To mitigate the potential railway operation noise to an acceptable level, the following mitigation measures are proposed.

 

•           For operation between 0600 and 0700 (beginning of traffic peak)and after 2300 when noise criteria are most stringent, six skirted trains will be operated in each direction per hour. Consideration is being given to the provision of additional mitigation measures at key locations, which would allow for operation of unskirted East Rail trains during this hour.

 

•           Full enclosure over points and crossings just north of the Sheung Shui Station is proposed to mitigate the airborne noise at the high rise RNSRs found near Sheung Shui Station.

 

•           A 200 m long, 2 m tall sound absorptive noise barrier will be used for additional screening of airborne noise for RNSRs 11 and 12.

 

•           FST will be installed for viaduct sections between Sheung Shui and Kwu Tung. LVT will be used on other viaduct sections.

 

•           A standard viaduct design with a parapet extending to 1.2 m above the safety walkway will be adopted on all viaduct sections;

 

•           The standard viaduct design, in which a safety walkway is installed on side and median walls, will be adopted on the at-grade ballasted embankment/cutting section west of Kwu Tung.

 

3.5.75              Following the implementation of the above mitigation measures the residual noise at RNSRs will meet both the daytime and nighttime noise assessment criteria.

 

3.5.76              In the absence of a defined layout for Kwu Tung SGA, noise levels have been calculated at distances indicated by Planning Department. Mitigation may be required for those NSRs close to the railway reserve, in the form of reduced train speed or additional barriers/enclosures.

 

3.5.77              Cumulative impacts from Spur Line and the existing East Rail were evaluated to examine the relative impact from each rail operation.  The existing East Rail operation has a significantly higher noise level than that arising from Spur line operation.  Mitigation which has been incorporated into the Spur Line design minimizes the impact from Spur Line on cumulative noise levels, and also has a positive effect of reducing noise levels from the existing East Rail operation.

 

3.6                        Conclusions

 

3.6.1                  Potential noise impact due to construction activities, railway operation and electrical/mechanical equipment at Lok Ma Chau Station were predicted for the RNSRs identified. Short term construction noise impact exceeding criteria by 1 to 57 dB(A) is expected at approximately 1126 noise sensitive receivers after implementation of all practicable mitigation measures. The maximum period of exeedance at any one RNSR will be 1 month. Regular and ad-hoc monitoring and audit programme was proposed for these affected receivers. Design noise limits were proposed for the electrical and mechanical plant located at Lok Ma Chau Terminus to ensure Noise Control Ordinance criteria are complied with during plant operation.

 

3.6.2                  To mitigate railway noise impacts to an acceptable level, the following mitigation measures have been proposed.

 

•           Full enclosure over a crossing just north of Sheung Shui Station.

 

•           A 200 m long, 2 m tall noise barrier north of Tsung Pak Long.

 

•           FST to be installed on viaduct sections between Sheung Shui and Kwu Tung.

 

•           LVT to be installed on the western viaduct section i.e. west of the embankment section at Chau Tau, through to Lok Ma Chau Terminus.

 

•           Train service to be provided by six skirted trains to operate in each direction per hour between 0600~0700, and during any one hour after 2300 when the noise criteria is the most stringent when the beginning of the traffic peak hour coincides with the most stringent noise criteria for many RNSRs. Consideration is being given to the provision of additional noise mitigation in key areas to allow for operation of unskirted East Rail trains during this hour.

 

•           Standard viaduct design with a parapet extending to 1.2 m above the safety walkway to be installed at all viaduct sections.

 

•           Standard viaduct design with a parapet extending to 1.2 m above the safety walkway on at-grade ballasted cutting/embankment section west of Kwu Tung.

 

•           Within areas planned for residential or other noise sensitive uses in the Kwu Tung SGA, the railway will be designed to allow for additional noise mitigation if this is required in the future.

 

3.6.3                  Consideration of future development along Spur Line, in particular Kwu Tung SGA, indicates that, for sensitive receivers close to the railway reserve, some mitigation may be required in the form of reduced train speed or additional barriers/enclosures.

 

3.6.4                  Assessment of cumulative impacts indicates that the existing East Rail operation has a significantly higher noise level (more than 10 dB(A) higher) than that arising from Spur line operation. Mitigation on Spur Line reduces the noise to a level which results in its contribution to the cumulative noise level being insignificant. Mitigation for Spur Line will also reduce noise levels on existing East Rail operation.

 

3.7                        References

 

1          Technical Memorandum of Environmental Impact Assessment Process, 1997, Environmental Protection Department, Hong Kong Government

2          Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance Cap. 499, 1997, Hong Kong Government

3          Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines, Planning Department, 1989, Hong Kong Government

4          Hong Kong Town Planning Board, Town Planning Ordinance, Fanling / Sheung Shui - Outline Zoning Plan No. S/FSS/7

5          Hong Kong Town Planning Board, Town Planning Ordinance, Kwu Tung South - Outline Zoning Plan No. S/NE-KTS/4

6          Hong Kong Town Planning Board, Town Planning Ordinance, Kwu Tung North - Outline Zoning Plan No. S/NE-KTN/2

7          Hong Kong Town Planning Board, Town Planning Ordinance, San Tin - Outline Zoning Plan No. S/YL-ST/1

8          Technical Memorandum for the Assessment of Noise from Places other than Domestic Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites, 2nd Edition, Environmental Protection Department, June 1997, Hong Kong Government

9          Noise survey conducted by KCRC (Mid Life Refurbished EMUs)

10      Nelson, P. M., "Transportation Noise Reference Book", Butterworths & Co. Ltd., 1987

11      Nelson, J. T., "Transit Cooperative Research Program Report 23 - Wheel/Rail Noise Control Manual", Transportation Research Board, National Research Council (1997) pp. 25-32

12      Saurenman, H. J., Nelson, J. T. and Wilson, G. P., "Handbook of Urban Rail Noise and Vibration Control", U.S. Department of Transportation, February 1982

13      Peters, S. " The Prediction of Railway Noise Profiles, " Journal of Sound Vibration, Vol. 32, No. 1 (1974) pp. 87-99

14      Crockett, A.R., Daroux, P.A. and Wilson G.P., "Concept Specification and Noise Evaluation of the Multi-Plenum Model for Train Noise Attenuation of the KCRC West Rail", Wilson, Ihrig & Associates prepared for ERM Hong Kong Ltd., December 1997

15      Marsden P. R., Pyke J. R. and Bullen R., " West Rail Initial and Final Assessment Report", Environmental Impact Assessment Contract TS900, ERM Hong Kong Ltd., prepared for Kowloon Canton Railway Corporation, January 1998

16      Beranek, L.L., Noise and Vibration Control, McGraw-Hill (1971)

17      American Society of Heating and Refrigeration Engineers, 1995 Applications Handbook

18      Maekawa, Z., Noise Reduction by Screens, Applied Acoustics (1) (1968)

19      Crockett, A.R. and Wilson G.P., "Concept Specification and Structure Radiated Noise Evaluation of the KCRC West Rail Viaduct", Wilson, Ihrig & Associates prepared for ERM Hong Kong Ltd., March 1998

20      Remington, P., "Wheel/Rail Rolling Noise, II : Validation of the Theory", J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 81(6), June 1987

21      Crockett, A. R. and Pyke, J. R., " Viaduct Design for Minimization of Direct and Structure Radiated Train Noise", presented at the International Workshop on Railway Noise (IWRN), November 1998

22      Noise Control on Construction and Open Sites, BS5228 : Part 1 : British Standards Institution, 1984

23      “A Guide to Measurement and Prediction of the Equivalent Continuous Sound Level”, UK Noise Advisory Council

24      Kurze, U.J. and G.S. Anderson, Sound Attenuation by Barriers, App. Acoustics (4), 1977

25      Allied Environmental Consultants Limited, "Noise Measurement Survey Report - Study of the Refurbished EMUs”, Issue 1, September 1998

26      Kowloon Canton Railway Corporation Preliminary Project Study Contract No. EA980020; Implementation Proposal to Government; Technical Report; Binnie-Meinhardt JV


[1]               Annex 5, Table 1, Technical Memorandum of Environmental Impact Assessment Process, 1997, Environmental Protection Department, Hong Kong Government.

[2]               Table 3, Technical Memorandum for the Assessment of Noise from Places other than Domestic Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites, 2nd Edition, Environmental Protection Department, June 1997, Hong Kong Government.

[3]               Table 3, Technical Memorandum for the Assessment of Noise from Places other than Domestic Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites, 2nd Edition, Environmental Protection Department, June 1997, Hong Kong Government.

[4]               Marsden P.R., Pyke J.R. and Bullen R. West Rail EIA Final Report (1998). ERM HK Ltd for KCRC.

[5]               Leo L. Beranek, Noise and Vibration Control, pp 174-180, McGraw-Hill, 1988

[6]               Marsden P.R., Pyke J.R. and Bullen R. West Rail EIA Final Report (1998). ERM HK Ltd for KCRC.

[7]               KCRC East Rail Noise Control - New Fleet : Noise Measurement Survey Report by Allied Environmental Consultants Ltd, Issue 1, June 1998.