Agenda Item 1 : Confirmation of Minutes
of the 98th Meeting held on 29 July 2002
A Member proposed to delete the last
sentence from para. 41 of the draft minutes. The minutes were
confirmed subject to the proposed amendment.
Agenda Item 2 : Matters Arising
Matters arising from the minutes of 97th
meeting
Para. 10 : Permit condition proposed by Green Lantau Association
2. Mr. Rob Law informed the meeting
that as there was no provision in the Environmental Impact
Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) empowering him as the approving
authority to impose additional penalty against violation of
the terms of an environmental permit, he had no authority
to impose the requirement of a bond as a permit condition.
However, he understood that the Highways Department was looking
into administrative measures that could serve the same purpose.
3. Mr. Law agreed with the Chairman's
suggestion that the need for such a provision should be examined
if the EIAO was reviewed in future.
Matters arising from the minutes of 98th
meeting
Para. 4 : Meeting with stakeholders
4. The EIA Subcommittee Chairman informed
the meeting that the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
Subcommittee would discuss the subject of meeting with stakeholders
at its next meeting.
Para. 49 : Mr. Loh Ah Tuan's visit
5. The Chairman informed Members that
due to other commitments, Mr. Loh had postponed his visit
to Hong Kong and hence could not attend the present meeting.
Agenda Item 3 : Report on the 73rd meeting
of the Environmental Impact Assessment Subcommittee
(ACE Paper 28/2002)
6. The EIA Subcommittee Deputy Chairman
summarized the major concerns of the Subcommittee on the EIA
report on Deep Bay Link (DBL) and drew Members' attention
to the proposed conditions set out in para. 16 of ACE Paper
28/2002.
7. The Chairman asked about the nature
of preparatory work that needed to be carried out for DBL
before the completion of the EIA report on Shenzhen Western
Corridor (SWC). In response, the EIA Subcommittee Deputy
Chairman said that it was mainly related to land resumption.
8. A Member asked whether the project
proponent had agreed to the proposed conditions. He also enquired
about the implications for DBL if the EIA report on SWC was
not approved. In response, the EIA Subcommittee Deputy
Chairman said that the project proponent was informed
of the proposed conditions at the Subcommittee meeting and
had not raised any objections. As regards DBL, the project
could not start construction if the EIA report on SWC was
not approved. The Chairman supplemented that once agreed
by the full Council, the proposed conditions would be submitted
to the Director of Environmental Protection as the Council's
advice and the Director had the discretion to decide whether
or not to adopt the proposed conditions.
9. Referring to para. 16 (d) of the paper,
a Member expressed concern and another Member
concurred that the proposed condition might set a precedent
of requiring a project proponent to provide alternative accommodation
for residents affected by temporary residual noise impact
and that would have significant implications for future designated
projects, particularly if a large number of affected persons
were involved. In response, the EIA Subcommittee Deputy
Chairman clarified that the proposed condition was based
on the Subcommittee's sentiment that the project proponent
should look after the interest of the affected residents despite
the temporary nature of the noise impact. It was just a proposal
for consideration of the project proponent. In response to
the Chairman's enquiry, Mr. Law said that he was not
aware of any precedent case in which the project proponent
provided alternative accommodation for individuals affected
by residual noise impact but there had been cases of the project
proponent paying the air conditioning expenses incurred by
the affected households during the impact period.
10. A Member noted that the six dwellings
were not qualified for the provision of air-conditioning under
"existing guidelines". He asked what those guidelines were.
In response, Mr. Law said that as he was not at the
Subcommittee meeting, he was not certain about the context
of the discussion. The guidelines might likely be those agreed
among works departments to deal with excessive traffic noise
impacts arising from the operation of new roads. Another
Member supplemented that according to his understanding,
the guidelines set out the specifications, like the magnitude
and duration of exceedances, for affected parties to be qualified
for the provision of air-conditioning.
11. In reply to the Member's follow-up question,
Mr. Law said that the Noise Control Ordinance only
governed piling activities and construction works during night
hours.
12. The EIA Subcommittee Deputy Chairman
said that at present there was no law governing construction
activities during daytime. The practice of the EIA Subcommittee
was to suggest measures to alleviate the noise impact based
on the magnitude and the duration of exceedances.
13. Sharing the concerns of the above Members,
another Member suggested revising the wording of para.
16(d) of the paper while retaining the spirit of taking care
of the interest of the affected residents. The EIA Subcommittee
Deputy Chairman suggested and Members agreed to replace
the words "alternative accommodation" with "relief" in para.
16(d).
14. On para. 16(f), a Member suggested
that instead of specifying the colour schemes to be or not
to be adopted, the project proponent should be asked to consider
designing noise barriers that would blend in with the surrounding
environment. Mr. Law supplemented that aesthetic designs
were subjective and that project proponents should be given
as much flexibility as possible in designing noise barriers.
In response to another Member's views, the Chairman
suggested and Members agreed to delete the words "such as
......Highway" from para. 16(f) of the paper.
-vis
the Council on Sustainable Development. Mrs. Rita Lau
undertook to relay Members' sentiment for the early establishment
of the Council on Sustainable Development to the Administration
and let Members know the progress in due course. 
|