Table 2.1 Environmental Comparison of Alternative Jetty Location Options

Environmental Issue	Option 1	Option 2 – Alternative at north of bay	Option 3 – Alternative at south of bay at bulkhead (Selected Option)
Water quality / dredged sediment	Largest jetty structure and approach channel would result in highest impact on water quality from marine construction works including dredging; and greatest volume of dredged sediment requiring disposal (14,300 m^3)	Smaller jetty structure with lower impact on water quality. Smaller dredged volume of 6,600 m^3	Smaller jetty structure with lower impact on water quality. Smaller dredged volume of 5,550 m^3
Marine ecology	Longest catwalk (about 62 m long and 5m wide, with an area of 310 m^2) and largest approach channel (about 8,300 m^2) in the middle of the bay would result in the highest impact on marine ecological resources within the Sha Chau & LKC Marine Park, including the important Chinese White Dolphin. Largest loss of subtidal habitats	This location has a natural shoreline, with the highest density of intertidal organisms. Although Option 2 would involve a similar jetty size compared to Option 3, the larger approach channel (3,200m^2) and proximity to the shipwreck area which is a favourite site of the Chinese White Dolphin and has soft corals would also make this location less favourable.	Shorter catwalk (about 22 m long and 5m wide, with an area of 110 m^2) and smaller approach channel (1,978 m^2) with lower impact on marine ecological resources within the Sha Chau & LKC Marine Park including the important Chinese White Dolphin Lower impact than Option 2 as both the shore and backshore habitats have been previously disturbed
Terrestrial ecology	Limited impact on terrestrial habitat from construction of short footpath extension connecting proposed jetty and existing footpath	High impact from construction of new access route / footpath on the rugged natural coastal habitat (longer land route than Option 3)	Limited impact from construction of new access route / footpath on coastal / backshore habitat which has been largely disturbed
Land archaeology	Low impact potential on the LKC Archaeological Site due to shorter length of footpath	Higher impact potential from construction of new access route / footpath (longer land route than Option 3 and substantial excavation is likely to be required)	Low impact potential from construction of new access route / footpath that follows disturbed land
Marine archaeology	Higher impact potential on the LKC Archaeology Site due to greater disturbance of seabed area for approach channel (about 8,300 m^2)	Lower impact potential from smaller disturbance of seabed area for approach channel (3,200m^2)	Lower impact potential from smaller disturbance of seabed area for approach channel (1,978 m^2)
Visual / landscape	Larger jetty structure would result in greater visual intrusion and landscape loss of natural sea water area. Short footpath extension would result in limited landscape loss of natural coastal features	Smaller jetty structure would result in less visual intrusion and less landscape loss of natural sea water area. Footpath would result in highest landscape loss of natural rugged coastal features (longer land route than Option 3)	Smaller jetty structure would result in less visual intrusion and less landscape loss of natural sea water area. Footpath would result in limited landscape loss of existing disturbed coastal features
Cultural / Feng Shui	Preliminary support obtained from local villagers at Lung Kwu Tan	Consultation with local villagers undertaken and support has been obtained	Consultation with local villagers undertaken and support has been obtained