1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Project Background
General
1.1.1
The former Kai
Tak Airport
located in the south-eastern part of Kowloon
Peninsula was the international airport of Hong Kong. The Kai Tak Airport had come into operations since
1920s. The operation of the Kai Tak
Airport was ceased and
replaced by the new airport at Chek Lap Kok in July 1998. After closure, the disused airport site
has been occupied by various temporary uses, including a golf driving range on
the runway area.
1.1.2
In 2002, the Chief Executive in Council approved
the Kai Tak Outline Zoning Plans (No. S/K19/3 and S/K21/3) to provide the
statutory framework to proceed with the South East Kowloon Development at the
former Kai Tak Airport. However, following the judgment of the
Court of Final Appeal in January 2004 regarding the Harbour reclamation, the
originally proposed development which involved reclamation has to be
reviewed. The Kai Tak Planning
Review (KTPR) has resulted with a Preliminary Outline Development Plan (PODP)
for Kai Tak in October 2006.
Subsequently, the Administration announced in October 2006 a plan to implement a cruise terminal at
Kai Tak, as part of the development.
1.1.3
Development of the cruise terminal at Kai Tak
would require dredging at the existing seawall at the southern tip of the
former Kai Tak Airport
runway for construction of a berth structure and transition structures, and
dredging the seabed fronting the new berth structure to provide necessary
manoeuvring basin. The general
layout of the berth structure is provided in Figure 1.1.
Phasing of Development
1.1.4
It is planned to implement the cruise terminal
in two phases. Phase I Berth (the
southern portion) of 450m
long together with the southern transition structure of approximately 78m long are scheduled for operation and
completion by 2012 and the associated dredging for manoeuvring of cruise
vessels is scheduled for completion by 2011 (Figure 1.2). Phase II Berth (additional 400m) for the longer term together with
the northern transition structure are scheduled for operation and completion
after 2015 (Figure 1.3). The programme for dredging in the
manoeuvring basin for Phase II Berth is unconfirmed at this stage but its
completion can be extended up to 2020 and the earliest possible time for
conducting the dredging for Phase II Berth would be 2013 to 2014 after
decommissioning of the existing submarine gas pipelines. The actual program for
the required dredging would also depend on the need for the second berth as
driven by the cruise market. The
berth structure for Phase I and Phase II Berths would be built continuously for
completion by 2013.
Manoeuvring Area
1.1.5
Provision is required for manoeuvring area of
adequate depth for cruise vessels manoeuvring onto and off the berths. The layout and dimensions of the
manoeuvring area are shown in Figure 1.4
and have been confirmed by detailed engineering assessment, to be adequate for
safe manoeuvring of cruise vessels.
Dredged Depths
1.1.6
For overall cost effectiveness, initial
navigation dredging for the operations of Phase I and Phase II Berths should allow
for dredging to -12mCD. The area
alongside of the berth structure is to be dredged to provide a depth alongside
of -13mCD to allow for possible future deepening of the manoeuvring area if
future new vessels entail such water depth.
1.2
Project Benefits
1.2.1
The Government aims to develop Hong
Kong into a leading regional cruise hub through the development of
a world-class cruise terminal with state-of-the-art facilities which are
user-friendly, and provide efficient and quality services. The facilities and
services provided by the New Cruise Terminal should have built-in flexibility
to allow for adjustments to meet the need of different types of cruise vessels
and different cruise market segments. They form part of an overall experience
of a cruise passenger and add value to a cruise vacation. In October 2006, the
Government announced its plan to proceed with the development of a New Cruise
Terminal on a site of 7.6 hectares at the southern end of the former runway in
the Kai Tak Development.
1.2.2
One of the key considerations for locating the
New Cruise Terminal at Kai Tak is that it is the only site within the Victoria Harbour with the capability to provide
two or more berths without reclamation. The proposed location for the New
Cruise Terminal at the southern end of the runway has a deep seabed and large
manoeuvring space along the former runway for receiving mega cruise vessels.
Besides, public consultations on the Kai Tak Planning Review (KTPR) concluded
that there was general support in the community for the early implementation of
the New Cruise Terminal in the Kai Tak Development.
1.2.3
Upon completion of the New Cruise Terminal,
together with the existing cruise terminal in Tsim Sha Tsui, Hong
Kong will have four berths in total for cruise vessels. This will better
serve the needs of the cruise industry and help sustain Hong
Kong’s development as a regional cruise hub.
1.3
Potential consequences without the
Project
1.3.1
The proposed dredging works are essential for
construction and operation of the proposed cruise terminal at Kai Tak to
provide the space needed for safe manoeuvring of cruise vessels clear of the
fairway and cruise berth. Without the proposed dredging works, the safety of
the cruise vessels’ manoeuvring will be in question.
2.1.1
The scope of the Project comprises:
· dredging
of marine sediment of about 1,380,000
m3 from the existing seabed in the Harbour area off the
southern tip of the former Kai Tak Airport runway to provide the necessary
water depth within the manoeuvring area for cruise vessels; and
· Removal
of existing seawall of about 322,300
m3 by dredging at the southern tip of the former Kai Tak
Airport runway for cruise
berth construction.
2.1.2
The Project is a Designated Project in
accordance with Item C.12 of Part I, Schedule 2 of the EIAO, which specifies an
“a dredging operation exceeding 500,000 m3”.
2.1.3
It is planned to implement the proposed dredging
in two stages. The staged dredging
requirements for the cruise terminal are shown in Figure 1.4. The breakdown of the dredging volumes is
given in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1 Volume
of Dredging
|
Stages (Figure 1.4)
|
Volume of
Dredging (m3)
|
|
From Existing
Seabed in the Harbour Area
|
From Existing Seawall
|
|
Stage 1
Dredging Total:
|
700,000
(1)
|
322,300
|
|
Stage 2
Dredging Total:
|
680,000
|
-
|
|
Total
(Stage 1 + Stage 2):
|
1,380,000
|
322,300
|
Note 1: The
total volume of 700,000 m3 includes the dredged material of 20,000 m3
to be generated from removal of the abandoned KTR outfall as shown in Figure
1.4.
3.1
Site Location
3.1.1
Adequate water depth, turning basin and landside
developable space are the three key requirements in determining the location of
cruise terminal. The proposed location at the runway tip would be best able to
meet the above requirements when compared to the rest of Kai Tak. The PODP has
proposed two-alongside berths configuration comprising a continuous 850 m long berth structure to cater for
simultaneous berthing of one 360m
and one 345m long cruise
vessel. This is expected to be able to accommodate the longest cruise vessel
commissioned to date. The proposed
location for the cruise terminal at the runway tip has the deepest seabed along
the former runway and larger manoeuvring space for receiving mega cruise
vessels. The access from and to the main fairway is also a very direct
one. Relocating the cruise terminal
to the middle part of the former runway will affect the operation of the
existing typhoon shelter, mooring buoys and submarine gas pipeline, which in
turn would affect the implementation programme of the cruise terminal. Besides, more extensive seabed dredging
would be required as the water depth there is much shallower (about 2-6m). This will not only increase the
technical difficulties but will also bring about more severe environmental
implications.
3.1.2
An alternative location for the cruise terminal
at West Kowloon has been considered. The West Kowloon proposal is considered inappropriate in view
of the water depth of the foreshore area for manoeuvring and/or berthing of
mega cruise ships. The impact on the existing marine facilities and more
importantly, the surrounding road network, public transport system and
supporting facilities is considered unacceptable and as such this proposal was
not supported.
3.2
Dredging Extent
3.2.1
The proposed size and configuration of the
manoeuvring area is based on the minimum extent required for safe manoeuvring
of cruise vessels as determined by the real time vessel simulation in order to
minimize the associated waste generation as well as the direct disturbance to
marine ecological and fisheries resources.
3.3
Dredging Programme
3.3.1
The programme for Stage 1 dredging is governed
by the required commissioning date of the first berth. Thus, dredging required
for operation of the first berth has to be carried out during the period from
later half of 2008 to 2011 as the first stage in order to meet the
commissioning programme for the first berth. Due to the site constraints, dredging
for the second berth would need to be carried out at a later stage after
decommissioning of the existing submarine gas pipelines. The actual program for Stage 2 dredging
would also depend on the future demand for the cruise terminal. The current tentative programme is to
commence the Stage 2 dredging in 2013 for completion in 2014 for the purpose of
this EIA. The selected time horizon
is the earliest possible timing for Stage 2 dredging. Our modelling assessment for Stage 2
dredging has included the impacts of all possible concurrent marine works
anticipated in or beyond 2012 except for the maintenance dredging described in
Section 3.3.2. Maintenance dredging
will not be carried out concurrently with the Stage 2 capital dredging.
Therefore, no alternative programme has been considered for the capital
dredging. Based on the water
quality model predictions provided in the EIA report, no unacceptable water
quality impacts are expected under the assumed programme for capital dredging
with implementation of all the recommended mitigation measures.
3.3.2
The duration of maintenance dredging would be
less than 6 months for each berth.
Alternative programme for the maintenance dredging to be carried out in
either dry or wet seasons has been considered under the water quality impact
assessment. Based on the model predictions, maintenance dredging in wet season
would contribute larger water quality impact and is therefore not preferred. It
is recommended in this EIA that the maintenance dredging should not be
programmed in wet seasons (April to September) to avoid the potential water
quality impacts.
3.4
Dredging Equipment
3.4.1
Closed grab dredgers are considered as the most
suitable dredgers for small volumes and contaminated mud. It is feasible to use small trailer
suction dredgers yet these will give less control over handling of contaminated
mud and produce more marine sediment by volume (due to high water content) when
compared with grab dredging. Larger
equipment as adopted for major reclamation projects such as the Penny’s Bay
reclamation and the Container Terminals in Kwai Chung has been considered. However, given that dredging is not on
the critical path of the construction programme of the cruise terminal, it is
suggested that closed grab dredgers being the most cost effective construction
method with the least environmental impact shall be adopted for the dredging
works for the cruise terminal.
3.5
Dredging Method, Dredging Rates and
Staged Dredging Requirements
3.5.1
The capital dredging works will be carried out
in two stages, in the areas as indicated in Figure 1.4. The total volume of capital
dredging is estimated as 700,000 m3
for Stage 1 and 680,000m3
for Stage 2. The rates of dredging from existing seabed to provide the proposed
manoeuvring area will not exceed 4,000m3
per day (using 2 closed grab dredgers) during both Stage 1 and Stage 2 dredging
period. The dredging at and near
the seawall area for berth construction will be carried out concurrently with
the Stage 1 dredging at a maximum rate of 4,000m3
per day by 2 closed grab dredgers.
3.5.2
The total volume of maintenance dredging is
estimated as 350,000m3
once every 5 to 10 years. The rates of maintenance dredging will not exceed 2,000m3 per day (using 1 closed grab
dredger).
3.5.3
The dredging locations, rates, timing and phased
implementation have been analyzed and confirmed by the technical assessments
performed under this EIA to be environmentally acceptable. In particular,
modelling assessment has been carried out under this EIA to assess the water
quality impacts of undertaking the dredging in either the dry or wet season and
concluded that the proposed dredging rates, locations and timing would not
cause any unacceptable water quality and marine ecological impact, provided
that all the mitigation measures recommended under this EIA are properly
implemented.
3.6
Berth Structure
3.6.1
Dredging of existing seawall would be required
for berth construction. The cruise
terminal berth structure would need to be constructed within the land limits as
a measure to protect and preserve the Harbour. Preliminary schemes for six types of
berth structures have been developed and reviewed including:
Ÿ
Option 1 – Piled Quay Deck;
Ÿ
Option 2 – Precast Reinforced Concrete Caisson;
Ÿ
Option 3 – Precast Concrete Blockwork Seawall;
Ÿ
Option 4 – Bored Pile Retaining Wall with
Anchor;
Ÿ
Option 5 – Precast Reinforced Concrete Counterfort Wall; and
Ÿ
Option 6 – Sheet Pile Cofferdam Wall
3.6.2
After reviewing all the factors, Options 4, 5
and 6 are not recommended based on engineering considerations. Amongst the three short listed options,
the piled quay deck (Option 1) would require the least amount of dredging at
the existing seawall during construction.
For the purpose of this EIA, however, Options 2 and 3 are assumed to be
adopted to allow flexibility for the future in recognition that the cruise
terminal developer may choose an alternative to the quay deck structure. In environmental terms the main difference
between Options 1, 2, and 3 is the volume of dredging from the existing
seawall. It should be noted that the volume of dredging from the existing
seawall is significantly less in the case of Option 1, therefore the allowance
for Options 2 and 3 in this EIA represents a worst case assumption
4.1
Air Quality Impact
4.1.1
Dredging activities are marine based activities
and negligible dust impacts on nearby air sensitive receivers (ASRs) would be
expected. Referring to the marine
site investigation results, the acid volatile sulphide (AVS) levels measured in
all the sediment samples collected from the dredging area of the proposed
cruise terminal were below the detection limit of 1 mg/kg. In general, high AVS concentrations in
sediment indicate that odorous hydrogen sulphide gas is likely to be generated
from the sediment. These AVS levels
are far below the AVS levels of the odour remediated sediments collected from Shing Mun
River and Sam Ka Tsuen
Typhoon Shelter. Therefore, it is
expected that the potential odour emissions from the sediments within the
dredging area of the proposed cruise terminal would be minimal and adverse
odour impact from the dredging activities in the Stage 1 and 2 areas would not
be anticipated. Adverse odour
impacts during the capital dredging are therefore not expected. Maintenance dredging would be carried
out once every 5 to 10 years and adverse odour impacts at ASRs are also not
expected.
4.2
Noise Impact
4.2.1
This EIA has predicted the construction noise
impacts of the Project during normal daytime working hours, taking into account
other concurrent projects within a 300m
study area. Based on the latest
available information, there are no existing Noise Sensitive Receivers (NSRs)
identified within 300m
from Project boundary and only two representative planned NSRs are identified
for assessment during the Stage 2 dredging period as a conservative
approach. Under the unmitigated
scenario, the noise levels at all the representative planned residential NSRs
would comply with the construction noise standard, and therefore no adverse
noise impact is expected. Good site practices are recommended to further
ameliorate the impacts. A
construction noise environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) programme is
recommended to check the compliance of the noise criteria during normal daytime
working hours if any planned NSRs within the 300m study area are occupied during the proposed
dredging works.
4.2.2
Assessment on noise impact from maintenance
dredging was also conducted.
Results indicated that the predicted noise at the nearest NSRs would
comply with the construction noise criterion of 75 dB(A).
4.3
Water Quality Impact
4.3.1
The water quality impact during the proposed
dredging works has been assessed by mathematical modelling. Suspended solids are identified as the
most critical water quality parameter during the dredging operations. The worst-case scenarios for the
dredging works have been assessed and it is predicted that potential water
quality impacts could occur at the flushing water intakes along the waterfront
of the Victoria Harbour. However, the water quality impacts upon
the intakes could be effectively minimized with the implementation of the proposed
mitigation measures including deployment of silt curtains at appropriate
dredging areas, and installation of silt screens at selected seawater
intakes. There would be no
unacceptable residual water quality impact due to the proposed capital and maintenance
dredging works. A water quality
monitoring and audit programme is recommended to verify whether or not impact
predictions are representative, and to ensure that the proposed mitigation
measures are implemented properly.
4.4
Waste Management Implications
4.4.1
The total volume of dredged sediment generated
from the dredging of the seabed to provide the manoeuvring basin for the cruise
terminal is estimated to be approximately 1.38
Mm3 during construction phase. Based on the results of the chemical and
biological screening, approximately 430,000
m3 was classified as contaminated dredged sediment (Category M
and H) requiring Type 1 – Open Sea Disposal (Dedicated Sites) or Type 2 -
Confined Marine Disposal, and approximately 950,000 m3 was classified as Category L
sediment suitable for Type 1 - Open Sea Disposal in accordance with the
Environment, Transport and Works Bureau Technical Circular (Works) (ETWB TCW)
No. 34/2002 “Management of Dredged / Excavated Sediment”.
4.4.2
The total volume of dredged sediment generated
from maintenance dredging during operational phase is estimated to be
approximately 350,000 m3
every 5 to 10 years. Prior to any
maintenance dredging, sediment sampling and testing will be carried out in
accordance with the ETWB TCW No. 34/2002 to determine the contamination level
of the dredged sediment. The most
appropriate open sea or confined marine disposal site will be allocated for
proper disposal of the dredged sediment on the basis of the chemical and
biological test results in accordance with the ETWB TCW No. 34/2002.
4.4.3
The total volume of C&D material generated
from the removal of the existing seawall by dredging for the berth structure
construction is estimated to be approximately 322,300 m3 during construction
phase. No C&D material would be
generated from maintenance dredging during operational stage of the proposed
cruise terminal. Other wastes
generated from the capital and maintenance dredging are likely to include
chemical waste from the maintenance of construction plant and equipment and
general refuse from the construction workforce.
4.4.4
It is assumed all the C&D material generated from the Project
would require off-site disposal.
Seawall construction relies very heavily on the grading of materials. If the
materials are not graded properly then there is the risk that the reclamation
will wash out through the seawall and the seawall will collapse. Whilst the
as-built drawings of the existing runway seawalls and reclamations have been
obtained they do not give any information as to the grading of the existing
materials. As such it is not possible with the information available to make
any accurate assessment as to which materials may be suitable for reuse. As
such a conservative estimate has been made for the purpose of the EIA. Nevertheless,
the contractor for capital dredging should investigate the potential for
reusing the C&D materials on site. If practical, the C&D material
generated from the Project should be sorted and any unsuitable material removed
to achieve the correct grading for seawall construction.
4.4.5
Mitigation measures are recommended in this EIA
to minimise potential environmental impacts associated with handling and
disposal of different wastes arising from the Project. Provided that the recommended mitigation
measures are properly followed, adverse environmental impacts would not be
expected from the capital and maintenance dredging.
4.5
Impact on Cultural Heritage
4.5.1
A Marine Archaeological Investigation (MAI) has
been conducted to identify any marine archaeological remains within the
proposed dredging area for construction of the new cruise terminal at Kai
Tak. The 2007 MAI did not locate
any archaeological resources but it established that it is possible that
archaeological material could be deeply buried within the sub-seabed sediments,
which may be adversely affected by the proposed dredging.
4.5.2
Due to the depth of proposed dredging and the
fact that the archaeological potential of the area cannot be completely ruled
out, the need of precautionary measures during dredging is required. Guidelines for a Monitoring Brief have
been prepared in consultation with the Antiquities and Monuments Office (AMO).
4.5.3
The heritage significance of the remaining
seawall structure is assessed to be low.
Yet, the dredging activities of the proposed cruise terminal should
ensure that disturbance to the existing seawall masonry outside the Project
boundary should be avoided as far as practicable.
4.6
Marine Ecological Impact
4.6.1
Literature reviews of existing information with supplement findings from recent
field surveys indicated that identified marine habitats within the
Project area are of generally very low ecological value. There are no ecological sensitive
receivers, such as Site of Specific Scientific Interests (SSSIs) and marine
parks and / or reserves and other areas of ecological importance or
conservation interest, in and within the immediate vicinity of the Project
area.
4.6.2
Marine habitats within the Kai Tak area include
soft bottom seabed, artificial seawalls, subtidal habitats and feeding ground
of waterbirds. All the identified
habitats are considered as generally very low of ecological value due to their
highly artificial and disturbed nature. Species diversity and abundance in
these habitats were low and no rare or restricted species was recorded. The species of conservation interest
recorded within the Project area only include a single species of common hard
coral (Oulastrea crispate) (but all colonies found are small
in size, sparsely distributed and in very low coverage) and few species
of waterbirds such as Little Egret and Great Egret. All these species of conservation
interest recorded within the Project area are common and widespread in other Hong Kong waters.
4.6.3
Direct and indirect ecological impacts arising
from the Project were identified and evaluated. The Project would result in the
temporary loss of approximately 57 hectares of soft bottom benthic and subtidal
habitats and about 1 km long of
artificial intertidal habitat.
Recent dive surveys revealed that there were about 1000 rocks / boulders
located in the hard substrata sea area that falls within dredging site but only
about 50 of them were found attached with small and isolated coral colonies. As
an additional measure to protect coral, it is recommended to translocate those
movable rocks / boulders attached with coral colonies to other nearby suitable
habitats such as Junk
Bay as far as
possible. Considering that the
benthic and intertidal habitats within the proposed dredging area are of very
low ecological value and direct impact on some isolated coral colonies would
largely be mitigated by translocation, no adverse impact is expected.
4.6.4
Other indirect impacts arising from the Project
would be temporary and minimised with implementation of proper mitigation
measures. Overall, no significant
and unacceptable ecological impact on marine resource was anticipated from the
Project.
4.7
Fisheries Impact
4.7.1
Literature reviews of existing information
indicated that identified fishing area in Kowloon
Bay, eastern Victoria Harbour
and Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter are of moderate to high fisheries values while
that in To Kwa Wan Typhoon Shelter and Kai Tak Approach Channel are of
relatively low value. There are no
Fish Culture Zones (FCZs) and important spawning or nursery grounds identified
in and within the immediate vicinity of the Project area. The nearest mariculture areas are FCZs
at Tung Lung Chau and Ma Wan which are 8
km and over 10 km
away, respectively, of the Project area.
4.7.2
Direct and indirect impacts on fisheries
resources arising from the Project were identified and evaluated. The Project will result in the temporary
loss of approximately 57 hectares of fishing area. In view of the small size of affected
area, temporary and insignificant loss of fisheries production and low impact
on fishing activities, fisheries impacts due to direct loss of fishing area
within the dredging area is considered as minor and acceptable.
4.7.3
Indirect impacts of change of water quality
arising from the Project would be temporary and insignificant based on the
predictions from water quality modelling.
Mitigation measures suggested in the water quality assessment to control
water quality would serve also to protect fisheries resources from indirect
impacts. No significant adverse
impact on fisheries resources would be expected from the Project and therefore
no necessary fisheries-specific mitigation measures would be required.
4.8
Environmental Monitoring and Audit
4.8.1
Environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A)
requirements for the Project have been specified in an EM&A Manual. The EM&A Manual contains details of
proposed baseline and compliance monitoring programmes, implementation schedule
of the environmental protection / mitigation measures, EM&A reporting
procedures and complaint handling procedures.
4.9
Environmental Outcomes
4.9.1
The major environmentally sensitive areas that
are potentially affected by the Project include planned developments on the
former Kai Tak
Airport runway, seawater intakes at
the waterfront of the Victoria Harbour, cultural heritage and ecological resources
within the proposed dredging areas, and marine ecological and fisheries
resources in the Victoria
Harbour. With the implementation of the proposed
control and mitigation measures and the EM&A programme, all the identified
sensitive receivers would be protected from adverse environmental impacts
arising from the Project. A summary
of the environmental impacts associated with the Project is given in Table
3.1.
