The minutes were confirmed subject to a Member's
amendments.
Agenda Item 2 : Matters Arising
Para. 2 : Copy of Guidance Notes
2. Members had no comments on the draft Guidance
Note. The Deputy Chairman suggested and Members agreed
that the Guidance Note be issued and reviewed by EPD in one
or two years' time.
Agenda Item 3 : Comprehensive Feasibility
Study for the Revised Scheme of South East Kowloon Development
(ACE-EIA Paper 3/2001)
3. The Deputy Chairman welcomed the
presentation team led by CE(KE)/TDD. He emphasized that since
the proponent would submit the EIA report of the Study at
a later stage, the views expressed or statements made by the
proponent and the comments of the Subcommittee Members at
the meeting should not pre-empt the statutory process of the
EIA report to be submitted under the EIA Ordinance. This would
also apply to individual designated projects under the Study.
CE(KE)/TDD then introduced the background of the Study
followed by a briefing of the findings of the Study by ARUP2.
4. A Member welcomed the environmentally
friendly transport (EFT) design such as the use of tunnels
and depressed roads. She asked whether more tunnels or depressed
roads could be used and why the requirement for road reserve
amounted to 23.6% of the total land use of the area. In response,
CE(KE)/TDD said that most major roads had been depressed
or routed through tunnels. For traffic and safety reasons,
it was not possible to put major interchanges underground.
There were also other constraints like underground structures.
He assured members that the estimated percentage of road reserve
was the minimum requirement.
5. A Member enquired about the road
reserve percentage for Tseung Kwan O Town as a point of reference.
CE(KE)/TDD said that he did not recall the figure for
Tseung Kwan O Town but for west Kowloon, it was about 30%.
ARUP1 supplemented that new towns usually required
approximately 30% of total land use for road reserve. For
SEKD, part of Prince Edward Road, Kwun Tong Road and Kwun
Tong Bypass, which fell within the relevant OZPs, and strategic
through routes like Trunk Road T1, T2 and Central Kowloon
Route had been included in the above percentage for road reserve.
If only those roads serving SEKD were counted, the percentage
for road reserve would be lower.
6. A Member found it encouraging that
trolley bus and light rail were proposed for SEKD area. He
asked whether the proponent had considered the "park
& ride" concept and restricting the use of private
vehicles in the area. ARUP1 said that smoke-free shuttle
system was proposed to link up the area and nearby railway
stations and only a low ratio of car park provision would
be adopted near the railway stations. He hoped that through
these measures, the use of private vehicles would be discouraged.
7. A Member was concerned that if private
vehicles were allowed in the area people would expect adequate
provision of parking facilities. If, however, the intention
was to discourage the use of private vehicles, he suggested
imposing restriction on access by vehicles so as to maximize
the use of EFT. In response, CE(KE)/TDD said that the
Study indicated that about 35% of residents would use non-railway
transport including private vehicles. The design of the road
system would discourage through traffic enrouting SEKD.
8. A Member concurred with that Member
and said that one should not on one hand permit access by
private vehicles but on the other hand do not provide adequate
parking facilities. If SEKD area was to be promoted as a "Garden
City" in which private vehicle was not a permitted form
of transport, the proponent should clearly convey the message
by imposing necessary restrictions. He also asked whether
there were parking facilities provided for visitors. Secondly,
he asked whether the three strategic roads would give access
to the SEKD area.
9. In reply to that Member, CE(KE)/TDD
said the use of private vehicles and EFT had been extensively
discussed during various stages of consultation. As a balanced
approach, car parks were provided near the three public transport
interchanges mainly for visitors' convenience to change to
other modes of transport into the area. As regards the three
strategic roads, the original design involved a five-level
junction but was later revised to only three-level to minimize
traffic noise and air quality problems. The design would discourage
traffic to enter the SEKD area as a bypass.
10. A Member welcomed the provision
of automatic refuse collection system and asked whether waste
separation facilities would also be provided to facilitate
waste recycling process. ARUP1 said that the design
of the collection system would be able to provide separate
inlets for disposal of different types of waste but the ultimate
success of the separation system would depend on the co-operation
of the residents.
11. In reply to a Member's question, another
Member said that the study on the water quality of typhoon
shelter was almost completed and the figures so far indicated
that they could comply with the water quality objectives.
He said that the assessment result would be included in the
final EIA report.
12. In response to a Member's question, ARUP1
said that 16 million cubic meter of fill materials would be
required for the reclamation of SEKD.
13. In response to a Member's question, ARUP2
said that three options would be proposed for sediment treatment.
The first would involve no dredging with in-situ treatment,
the second would involve dredging with ex-situ treatment,
and the third minimum dredging. For ex-situ treatment, suction
dredging using pipeline would be adopted, followed by treatment,
washing and dewatering of sediment. For special cases, further
treatment by bio-pile might be considered if necessary.
14. The Deputy Chairman thanked the
presentation team and looked forward to the formal submission
of the EIA report. CE(KE)/TDD said that their next step was
to consult the Town Planning Board and District Councils.
They intended to gazette the revised draft Kai Tak Outline
Zoning Plan in July and seek funding from the Finance Committee
in October 2001 for detailed design. They would submit the
EIA report to ACE in September.
Agenda Item 4 : Any Other Business
Selection of EIA reports
15. In relation to the selection of EIA projects
for consideration by the Subcommittee, a Member said
that there was a lack of formalism or guidelines for Members
to follow, which resulted in a lot of surmise in the work.
He would like to discuss with Members on how the process should
be improved.
16. On the invitation by the Deputy Chairman,
the Secretary briefed Members on the current selection
process.
|