2 PROJECT
DESCRIPTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES
2.2 Consideration
of Scenario Without the Proposed Development
2.3 Consideration
of Different Development Options
2.4 Summary of
Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP)
2.5 Consideration
of Alternatives
2.6 Proposed
Construction Methodologies for Land Uses and Design
2.7 Consideration
of Alternatives for Construction Methodologies
2.8 Summary of
Reclamation Area and Permanent Seabed Loss Area
Figure 2.1a Project Location Plan
Presented in EIA Study Brief
(ESB-251/2012)
Figure 2.1b Project Location Plan
Presented in EIA Study Brief
(ESB-283/2014)
Figure 2.1c Project Location Plan
Presented in EIA Study Brief
(ESB-285/2015)
Figure 2.2 Revised
Recommended Outline Development Plan - TCE
Figure 2.3 Revised
Recommended Outline Development Plan - TCW
Figure 2.4 Site IDs of RODP (TCE)
Figure 2.5 Site IDs of RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.6a Locations of Residential Land Use in RODP (TCE)
Figure 2.6b Locations of Residential Land Use in RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.7 Locations of Village Development Area in RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.8a Locations of Commercial Land Use in RODP (TCE)
Figure 2.8b Locations of Commercial Land Use in RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.9a Locations of Government Land Use in RODP (TCE)
Figure 2.9b Locations of Government Land Use in RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.10 Locations of Education Land Use in RODP (TCE)
Figure 2.11 Locations of Institution and Community Land Use in RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.12a Locations of Other Specified Uses Land Use in RODP (TCE)
Figure 2.12b Locations of Other Specified Uses Land Use in RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.13 Locations of Conservation Area Land Use in RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.14 Locations of Coastal Protection Area Land Use in RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.15a Locations of Open Space Land Use in RODP (TCE)
Figure 2.15b Locations of Open Space Land Use in RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.16 Locations of Green Belt Land Use in RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.17 Locations of Agriculture Land Use in RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.18a Locations of Road Land Use in RODP (TCE)
Figure 2.18b Locations of Road Land Use in RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.19a Locations of Public Transport Interchange in RODP
(TCE)
Figure 2. 19b Locations of Public Transport Interchange in RODP
(TCW)
Figure 2.20a Locations of Cycle Track Connections in RODP (TCE)
Figure 2.20b Locations of Cycle Track Connections in RODP (TCW)
Figure 2.21 Locations of Cycling Park in RODP (TCE)
Figure 2.22 Locations of Infrastructure Outside RODP
Figure 2.23 Total Permanent Seabed Loss
Figure 2.24a Locations of Development Phasing in TCE
Figure 2.24b Locations of Development Phasing in TCW
Appendices
Appendix 2.1 Detailed
Layout Plan of RODP for TCE and TCW
Appendix 2.2 Land
Use Options in PODP considered for TCE and TCW
Appendix 2.3 Conceptual Drawings of the Sustainable Drainage
System
Appendix 2.4 Schematic Cross Sections for Different Seawall
Construction Options
Appendix 2.5 Schematic Cross Sections for Different
Reclamation Options
Appendix 2.6 Connectivity
Options for Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section)
Appendix 2.7 Construction Programme
2.1.1
Territory-Wide
Housing Issues
2.1.1.1 Housing has been long identified as an issue of great public concern. According to the statistics in 2011, there are currently 2.6 million residential units in HK, accommodating 2.35 million households. Of those, 730,000 households live in Public Rental Housing (PRH) and 380,000 in self-owned units acquired with government subsidies. In other words, almost half of the households in HK are benefiting from some form of housing subsidy by the Government. Of the remaining 1.24 million households living in private properties, 870,000 are owner-occupants. Taken together, nearly 85% of households live in PRH units, subsidised home ownership scheme (HOS) flats or their own private properties. Hence, housing has been one of the focus areas in the Policy Addresses for last few years.
2.1.1.2 The 2011-2012 Policy Address had identified that maintaining PRH production, maintaining affordable price for private property and providing adequate land supply would be the key to tackle issues relating to housing. For PRH production in particular, the first challenge is the shortage of land and it is necessary to open up new sites and explore ways to appropriately increase the densities and plot ratios of PRH projects without compromising the living environment. The second challenge is the objection of some local communities to PRH development. In terms of land supply, the government set a target for an average of 20,000 private residential flats each year in the next decade in order to ensure the healthy and stable development of the property market. The 2011 – 2012 Policy Address had also stated that, according to the Public Housing Construction Programme of the Housing Authority (HA), about 75,000 PRH units will be completed in the next five years.
2.1.1.3 In 2012 – 2013 Policy Address, the objectives for housing were to (i) assist grassroots families to secure public housing to meet their basic housing needs; (ii) assist the public to choose accommodation according to their affordability and personal circumstances, and encourage those who can afford it to buy their own homes; (iii) provide subsidised home ownership flats on top of PRH so as to build a progressive housing ladder; and (iv) maintain the healthy and steady development of the private property market, with priority to be given to meet HK permanent residents’ needs. A series of strategies has been identified to address the land supply issue in short, medium and long term. Of particular relevance is the development of Lantau Island. With the rapid development of the west bank of the Pearl River Delta, Qianhai, Nansha and Hengqin, coupled with the availability of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge and other infrastructure, the northwest of HK will become a focal point of development. Lantau Island, in particular Tung Chung, has a geographical advantage for the development of logistics, tourism and other industries, hence creating new employment opportunities for the local residents. In fact, the government commenced the Tung Chung New Town Extension Study in Year 2012 to explore the potential of developing the remaining Tung Chung into a new town with more comprehensive and better developed community facilities.
2.1.1.4
Policy Address 2014 also examined the
housing issue and considered that the housing shortage problem had been
serious. Apart from soaring property and rental prices, cramped living
conditions trouble many HK people, the government identified a number of
strategies to tackle these issues, from short, medium and long terms. This Policy
Address also adopted the Long Term Housing Strategy Steering Committee’s
recommendation that public housing should account for 60% of the 10-year
housing supply target of 470,000 units. Among public housing, the supply of PRH
should be 200,000 units while that of subsidised sale flats 80,000 units. In
line with the annual roll-over approach, the Government would review and where
necessary adjust these splits between public and private housing, and between
PRH and subsidised sale flats to better respond to changing market situations
and evolving needs of the community. Besides, extension of the Tung Chung New
Town had also been highlighted again as one of the strategies to increase the
long term land supply. Similar statement was also emphasised in the Policy
Address 2015 on the need on the extension of Tung Chung New Town for supplying
residential units and a commercial hub.
2.1.2
The
Development of Tung Chung New Town
2.1.2.1 The development of Tung Chung New Town started in the 1990s under the original goal of establishing a supporting community for Hong Kong’s new international airport. In 1990, the Government commissioned Consultants to carry out planning of the North Lantau New Town (NLNT) and detailed feasibility studies collectively known as the North Lantau Development Study (NLDS). The NLDS was completed and a final report together with a Tung Chung and Tai Ho Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP) was produced in 1992. The NLDS and the RODP was subsequently approved by the then Development Progress Committee (DPC) in 1992. According to the NLDS, the NLNT would be developed in five phases with population level at 120,000 by 2006 (upon completion of Phases 1, 2 and 3) and 210,000 by 2011 (upon completion of Phase 4) ,and there was also development potential for an ultimate population of 260,000 after 2011 (Phase 5 developments).
2.1.2.2 In mid 1996, the Government completed the Territorial Development Strategic Review (TDSR) which identified housing shortfall in the medium to long term. The TDSR also identified the NLNT as a strategic growth area, among other areas, to meet the territorial housing demand, with a revised population target of 320,000 by 2011.
2.1.2.3 In 1996, the Administration approved the Development Statement for Tung Chung and Tai Ho with a population target of 320,000 by year 2011. The then Territory Development Department (TDD) commissioned Consultants in 1997 to carry out a consultancy study – Remaining development in Tung Chung and Tai Ho – Comprehensive Feasibility Study (CFS).
2.1.2.4 In 1999, TDD completed the CFS which showed that it was feasible for NLNT to accommodate a population target of about 334,000 in anticipation of the projected territory-wide demand by 2011. The Islands District Council, professional institutions, Advisory Council on Environment (ACE) and green groups were consulted on the recommendations of the study. Following consultation with the Town Planning Board of the RODP for Tung Chung and Tai Ho, the Administration briefed the Legislative Council Panel on Planning, Lands and Works in 2000 for funding approval to proceed with detailed design of engineering works. At the meeting, Members had reservation on the form of development at Tai Ho and requested the Administration to further consult the public. However, the RODP had been withheld due to subsequent changes in planning circumstances and bringing in the mega territorial infrastructure projects in North Lantau. These included the proposed logistics park in North Lantau as set out in the 2003 Policy Address and the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge (HZMB) with a landing point at North West Lantau.
2.1.2.5
In 2004, the Administration endorsed a new concept plan
for planning initiatives on Lantau which placed more emphasis on tourism,
economic infrastructure and nature conservation on Lantau with a corresponding
reduction in housing development. In 2004, the Lantau
Development Task Force commenced a three-month public consultation on the
Concept Plan for Lantau. According to the concept plan, part of NLNT
development was replaced by the Lantau Logistics Park (LLP) at Siu Ho Wan and a
possible theme park/major recreational uses in Tung Chung east subject to
feasibility studies. These were intended to enhance Hong Kong’s
competitiveness in the logistics industry and to enhance the attraction of
Lantau.
2.1.2.6
In 2007, the
Revised Concept Plan for Lantau was completed, featuring a greater emphasis on
tourism, economic infrastructure and nature conservation in Lantau. It should
be noted that the engineering
works for Phases 1 and 2 developments, and reclamation for Phase 3A had
been completed. The Phases 1 and 2 housing developments at NLNT have also been
completed. The housing developments of Phases 1, 2 and 3A have a total capacity
to accommodate about 108,000 people upon full occupation. Continuing
development of the North Lantau New Town (NLNT) is necessary to provide for a
more optimum scale of the new town to support the major community, commercial
and transport facilities and services required by the residents. According to
the Revised Concept Plan for Lantau, Tung Chung would be a
comprehensively planned new town with a capacity to accommodate a total
population of about 220,000. However,
some of the proposals under the Revised Concept Plan for Lantau are still being
reviewed and yet to be studied in details and implemented. According to the latest
Population Census, the
population in Tung Chung reached 78,400 in 2011.
2.1.3
Need for
Suitable Scale of Development in Tung Chung
2.1.3.1 As mentioned in Section 2.1.2, after the completion of CFS in late 1990s, it was recommended that Tung Chung would be developed in 4 phases. Currently, Phases 1, 2 and 3a development have been completed where the Tung Chung New Town is currently located. The recommended Phase 4 development under the CFS involved reclamation of the entire Tung Chung Bay, as well as the development of the Tai Ho area (originally accommodating a total population of 334,000). With the change in subsequent planning circumstances, further development was not proceeded at that time. The Tai Ho development area was excluded. Subsequently in the 2007 Revised Concept Plan for Lantau the planned population was reduced to 220,000.
2.1.3.2 The intention for this Study is to review and re-start the remaining development of Tung Chung. Due to the latest planning circumstances, and public concerns on the environmental sensitivity of the Tung Chung Bay, the proposal for TCW reclamation is not pursued, while the focus of the RODP will concentrate on the development in the reclamation in TCE and optimizing existing land in the TCW. Compared to the original Phase 4 development recommended under the CFS, the reclamation area is greatly reduced. (See Section 2.3.2 for more details on the comments from the PE exercises)
2.1.4
Aspirations
from Local Communities in Tung Chung
2.1.4.1
Since the
commencement of this study in Year 2012, a three-stage Public Engagement (PE) exercise
has been conducted to collate the views from various stakeholders, including
but not limited to local communities, NGOs etc. The comments received cover a
wide range of issues such as 1) Development scale and land uses; 2) Economic
development; 3) Ecology and environment; 4) Provision of facilities, and
housing; and 5) Transport and Infrastructures (see Section 2.3.2 for more details on the comments from the PE
exercises).
2.1.4.2
Though there
is a broad consensus for further development in Tung Chung, the local communities
in Tung Chung also demand the possibility to revitalise the local economy and
to stimulate economic growth by offering more job opportunities from the
development. There
is a strong need calling for more diverse job opportunities in Tung Chung that
can match the local skillsets. For instances, more local business such as small
street shops, local retailing services and commercial facilities etc. should be
provided so that more diverse kinds of job opportunities could be created. The
local communities also ask for a multi-sports stadium, extension of cycling
tracks, more GIC facilities such as wet markets, flea markets, religious
facilities, childcare centres etc, and tertiary education institution.
2.1.4.3
Given the
current urban context in Tung Chung, all the above aspirations would require
extra land to achieve. In fact,
according to the latest proposal (see Section
2.4 for details on latest land use planning), once the PDAs in TCE and TCW
are implemented, the RODP would provide a total floor area of 8.76ha for
commercial areas. Together
with the commercial components in the planned Metro Core Area, these commercial areas, including retails, offices
and hotel facilities would provide a total of around 40,000 permanent
employments during the operational phase.
These employment opportunities would cover a wide spectrum of job nature
such as retail services, office work, property management, hotel mangement,
tourism services etc. Besides, the current planning within the PDA has also
allowed the implementation of street shops and hence would satisfy the need
raised by the local communities. Without the proposed development at TCE and
TCW, all these aspirations from the local communities could not be
materialised.
2.1.5
Summary on the
Need for Further Developments in Tung Chung
2.1.5.1
It can be seen
from the above discussion in Section
2.1.1 to Section 2.1.4 that the territory-wide shortage of
housing supply has caused a number of social issues in HK. Tung Chung has been
identified by the recent Policy Addresses as one of the potential areas to
contribute to the land supply and abate the circumstances. While Tung Chung New
Town was first occupied decades ago, its current population is less than that originally envisioned. Throughout the PE
process, the local communities have raised a number of views and aspirations such as development
scale and landuses,
economic development, ecology and environment,
provision of facilities and housing,
transport and infrastructures etc.
Given the current urban context in
Tung Chung, extra land would be required to achieve many
of these views and aspirations. Hence,
as mentioned in Section 2.1.4, development
of the TCNTE, comprising new development areas in TCE and TCW, aims to provide land to meet the
future housing, economic and social development needs of Hong Kong.
2.1.6
Project Vision
2.1.6.1
Given the
unique development history and geographical setting of Tung Chung, there are
three key project visions in planning the development of TCNTE to suit the
needs of the society and the aspirations from the local communities:
2.1.6.2
Optimising living environment: The first vision is to help address the
territory-wide housing needs while enhancing the quality of living of residents
by adopting sustainable urban design and providing balanced allocation of open
space and community facilities. Since
the new town extension will extend the footprint of Tung Chung considerably,
the land formed would offer a good opportunity to address many of the aspirations
from the local communities such as sports ground, post-secondary institution,
comprehensive network of cycling tracks and other GIC facilities etc. Together
with development proposals in other parts of HK, it is envisioned that the
current housing issues could be progressively alleviated and would be
beneficial to the entire society.
2.1.6.3
Treasuring natural resources: Tung Chung is enjoying a number of valuable
natural resources including those from ecology, built heritage, natural
coastline, etc. Tung Chung Bay, Tung
Chung Stream, mudflat, mangroves, Tai Ho Bay, country parks, future marine park
are some of the examples of recognized ecologically sensitive areas. Built heritages such as monuments and graded
historical buildings in the vicinity have also reflected it’s richness in
history. The natural coastline in Tung
Chung West also has its own characteristics that are coherent with the western
part of Lantau. All these natural
resources in the vicinity of Tung Chung have therefore brought both constraints
and opportunities for planning of TCNTE.
2.1.6.4
In terms of achieving an environmentally
considerate planning, lots of initiatives have been proactively incorporated to
not just avoiding and minimizing environmental impacts, but also enhancing some
of the environmental conditions. A summary of those initiatives is given below,
and are discussed in more details in Section 14.
|
Avoidance of environmental impacts |
·
No
reclamation in TCW to avoid impact to Tung Chung Bay and Estuary ·
Avoidance
of encroachment on Tung Chung Stream ·
Avoidance
of emergency discharge from sewage pumping stations at both TCE and TCW ·
Avoidance
of using fully dredged construction method in TCE reclamation ·
Avoidance
of encroachment on natural resources with high ecological resources ·
Avoidance
of encroachment on built heritage |
|
Minimisation and mitigation of
environmental impacts |
·
Provision
of sustainable drainage system for TCW ·
Utilisation
of existing site formation for services reservoirs ·
Adoption
of stepped heights for buildings ·
Provision
of greening at TCE and TCW ·
Minimisation
of encroachment on Fung Shui Woods ·
Adoption
of transport oriented development principle, e.g. planning higher density
developments near the new TCE and TCW railway stations to help reduce
environmental impact arising from road traffic ·
Provision
of Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) connecting TCE and North Lantau
Highway (NLH) at the Tai Ho Interchange to minimise road traffic at Tung
Chung Town Centre ·
Provision
of setback distance between residential developments and NLH and Tuen Mun –
Chek Lap Kok Link ·
Provision
of direct noise mitigation measures within TCE and TCW etc. |
|
Environmental Enhancements |
·
Proper
zoning of Conservation Area, Coastal Protection Area and Green Belt within
TCW ·
Revitalization
of the existing channelised section of Tung Chung Stream ·
Provision
of a River Park at portion of the eastern branch of Tung Chung Stream to
promote eco-education ·
Provision
of proper sewerage system for the existing villages in TCW ·
Extension
of promenade for public enjoyment ·
Provision
of cycling tracks to improve connectivity within Tung Chung ·
Provision
of space to accommodate charging facilities for future generation of
environmentally friendly buses ·
Planting
of aquatic plants in biofiltration zone of attenuation and treatment ponds ·
Restoration
and enhancement of degraded habitats inside buffer zone ·
Planting
on the earth bunds of polders |
2.1.6.5
Enhancing job opportunities: The third vision is in response to the public
expectation of a wide variety of job opportunities for the residents of Tung
Chung. With the introduction of different commercial development, including
offices, retails, hotels and marina, TCNTE is expected to create various job
opportunities. Added with the nearby
developments, the job opportunities in Tung Chung will be more diversified,
ultimately encouraging employment within the district.
2.2
Consideration of Scenario Without the Proposed
Development
2.2.1.1
As discussed
in Section 2.1.4, the 3 stages of PE
exercises conducted for this study have provided an effective platform to
exchange views and opinions between the stakeholders and the Project Proponent.
The PE exercises have revealed a number of aspirations from the local
communities that would require extra land for development and a summary of
these aspirations is given below.
Table 2.1 Summary
of aspirations for local communities
|
Aspirations |
Benefits to the Local Communities |
Qty[1] |
|
Sport ground |
Currently, there is a sports centre located at
Man Tung Road. A lot of
public comments raise request for a sports ground in Tung Chung to address
local demand for multi-sports facilities. A sports ground which
can accommodate more than 10,000 persons has been allowed for in TCE. |
3ha |
|
Post-secondary
institution |
The
post-secondary institution in TCE
could provide specific training for local people to meet job requirements and
opportunities available in the area. |
2.5ha |
|
Comprehensive
cycling network |
The cycle
track network can improve the connectivity and cater for the needs of local
residents and tourists in Tung Chung. |
12km |
|
Other GIC
such as wet market, flea market, cultural heritage items etc. |
The wet
markets will be provided within subsidised housing estate in future
development run by Housing Authority while flea markets can be provided
within the open space area on application to the Leisure and Cultural
Services Department (LCSD). Existing temples and cultural heritage will be
preserved in the extension area to pay respect to cultural heritage. |
- |
[1]
Quantity as incorporated in latest RODP.
2.2.1.2
It can be seen
from the above table that all the above public aspirations on sports ground,
post-secondary institution and some Government, Institution or Community
(GIC) facilities would require an extra total land of about 16.5ha in TCE, and a
total of about 12km long cycle track (including 8.3km in TCE, 1.2km for Road P1
and 2.8km in TCW). This extra land
obviously cannot be made available for the benefits of the public without the
proposed developments in TCE and TCW. If
the proposed development is not implemented, all these public aspirations,
together with the needs for housing supply in HK, could not be addressed
properly.
2.3
Consideration
of Different Development Options
2.3.1
Applications for EIA Study Briefs
2.3.1.1
As discussed in Sections 1.1 and 1.3, a total of 3 Project Profiles have been
submitted to EPD in July 2012, December 2014 and March 2015 respectively for
application of EIA SBs. A summary table listing their respective details and
key elements presented in the EIA SBs is shown in Table 2.2 and their respective locations are shown in Figure 2.1a to Figure 2.1c.
Table 2.2 Summary of EIA SB applications
|
No. |
PP No |
EIA SB No. |
Date of Issue |
Key Elements Described in the
respective PP and EIA SB |
|
1 |
PP-470/2012 |
ESB-251/2012 |
28 Aug 2012 |
· A
total development area of about 285 ha (110 ha for TCE PDA and 175 ha for TCW
PDA); · A
total reclamation area of about 160 ha (110 ha for TCE PDA and 50 ha for TCW
PDA); and · A
possible theme park/ major recreational uses of about 40 ha at TCE PDA |
|
2 |
PP-519/2014 |
ESB-283/2014 |
28 Jan 2015 |
· Reclamation
of 120 hectare of land for formation of TCE; · Reclamation
of 9 hectare of land for extension of Road P1 from Tung Chung to Tai Ho; · Construction
of District Distributor roads and sewage pumping stations with capacity more
than 2,000m3/day within PDAs (locations to be confirmed); · Upgrading
of the existing Chung Mun Road sewage pumping station from the existing
capacity of about 3,500 m3/day to a proposed capacity of over
4,500 m3/day and a few sections of the existing rising
mains/sewers close to the PDA at TCW; · Construction
of a marina with about 95 berths at the PDA at TCE; · Construction
of an outdoor sporting facility with a capacity of over 10,000 persons; · Construction
of two possible Mass Transit Railway stations, with one at TCE and the other
one at TCW; · Construction
of a petrol filling station with an area of about 800m2; ·
Construction of two service reservoirs,
including one for fresh water and the other for flushing water, with
capacities of 55,000 m3 and 11,000 m3 respectively; ·
Construction of about 4 km long of dual
rising mains at TCE connecting a proposed sewage pumping station within the
PDA at TCE to the existing Siu Ho Wan (SHW) Sewage Treatment Works (STW);
while the upgrading works
required for the existing SHW STW will not be undertaken in this Project; ·
Possible waterfront promenade at the
coastal area of proposed Town Park; · De-channelization
of the existing channelized section of Tung Chung Stream for amenity uses and
environmental enhancement (e.g. river park); and · Possible
amenity uses and environmental enhancement (e.g. river park) in the land
adjacent to the immediate upstream of the channelized section of Tung Chung
Stream to Shek Mun Kap. |
|
3 |
PP-523/2015 |
ESB-285/2015 |
17 Apr 2015 |
· Key
elements as listed in ESB-283/2014 except the construction of two possible
Mass Transit Railway stations, with one at TCE and the other one at TCW as it
will be conducted by future railway operator · Construction
of a comprehensive network of cycle track of 12km long along the proposed
distributor roads, waterfront promenade, walkways and along future Road P1
from Tung Chung to Tai Ho; ·
Construction
of a possible cycle park with an area of about 1.4ha to be surrounded by slip
roads connecting the future Tai Ho Interchange to integrate with the cycle
tracks in TCE; ·
Construction
of a sustainable urban drainage system within TCW which may comprise polders,
dual-purpose stormwater attenuation and treatment ponds (locations and extent
to be confirmed); · Construction
of a village sewerage system for the unsewered villages within TCW (location
and extent of the sewerage to be confirmed); and · Space
provision of facilities for suitable green initiatives such as regional
energy efficiency system and environmentally friendly systems (such as
electric buses, electric cars and bicycle sharing system). |
2.3.1.2
However, as mentioned in Section 1.1, the Project Proponent has been proactively
conducting a series of public engagement exercises (including forums and workshops)
to collate views and opinions from stakeholders, green groups and local
communities etc. In parallel to the PE exercises, the planning and engineering
designs
of the Project have also been progressing and evolving to address various
constraints and development needs as well as the comments collated in
public engagement exercises. Major environmental related public comments
and corresponding solutions are summarised in subsequent sections.
2.3.2
Consideration of Public Comments
2.3.2.1
As mentioned in Section 2.1.4, a total of 3
PE Stages have been conducted to collate the views from various stakeholders
and the comments received cover a wide range of issues. The following table summarises the dates and
key objectives of the 3 stages of PE conducted.
Table 2.3 Key objectives of the 3 stages of PE conducted
|
Stage |
Date |
Key Objectives |
|
Stage 1 PE |
12 Jun 2012 to 12
Aug 2012 |
·
Outline the key constraints on environmental, planning and engineering
aspects · Gather public views through
discussions on issues, opportunities and constraints which form the basis for
preparing the initial land use options formulated under Stage 2 PE for
consultation |
|
Stage 2 PE |
21 May 2013 to 21
Jul 2013 |
· Present the initial land use
options for TCE and TCW for discussion after consideration of public views
collected in Stage 1 PE · Gather views to formulate the draft RODP for further public
consultation in PE3 |
|
Stage 3 PE |
15 Aug 2014 to 31
Oct 2014 |
· Present the draft RODP which has incorporated the comments on the
initial land use options received during Stage 2 PE |
Summary
of Stage 1 PE
2.3.2.2
Roving
exhibitions at four locations in Tung Chung, 7 numbers of briefing sessions
with concern groups and advisory bodies, a public forum and a questionnaire
survey had been conducted during the Stage 1 PE which commenced in June 2012
and completed in August 2012. Over 2,300
written submissions were also received. The key purposes of the Stage 1 PE were
to present the resources and constraints in further developing Tung Chung, and
to invite stakeholders to offer their views on the further development of Tung
Chung. It was basically an envisioning
process and no land use options were presented for discussion. Key views collated during this Stage 1 PE are
summarised in Table 2.4 below.
Table 2.4 Summary of key comments and approaches adopted to address comments collated in Stage 1 PE
|
Elements |
Key Comments |
Responses |
|
Development Needs |
· It
was generally agreed that there is a need and potential for further
development in Tung Chung. · Transportation,
community/ recreational facilities and job/ business opportunities were
considered as high priorities than the other areas of development. · There were queries on the necessity and feasibility of achieving the target population. |
· Comments
and suggestions on transportation, community/ recreational facilities, job/
business opportunities and the other development areas would be considered
and take into account where appropriate in formulating various development
themes and land use options. · Accommodation
of the additional population in Tung Chung PDAs by considering the
development opportunities and constraints would be further explored. |
|
Planning Vision |
· There was
broad consensus for a balanced development of Tung Chung in terms of
development intensity, environmental protection and social needs. · There were views suggesting Tung Chung to be developed into a tourist and recreational hub. |
· Balanced, tourism and recreational developments would be incorporated in the development options for further discussion at Stage 2 PE where appropriate. |
|
Land Supply and Demand |
· There
was a general preference for developing fallow agricultural land over
reclamation to increase land supply in Tung Chung West. Reclamation in Tung
Chung West, particularly in Tung Chung Bay, was strongly opposed due to its
high ecological, cultural and historical values. There was no major objection
to reclamation in Tung Chung East. · Resumption
of land for reselling to private developers was strongly opposed. |
· Development options with proposed reclamation extent would be formulated to address issues concerning development pressure, ecological conservation and cultural and historical preservation for further public consultation. · The need for land resumption will be carefully considered by relevant government departments. |
|
Housing Supply and Mix |
· There
was a general understanding that higher population and more housing
developments in Tung Chung would lead to more community and recreational
facilities, facilitate local economic development and consequently improve
the living standard of the residents. · A
balanced mix of public and private housing was demanded for community
coherence. |
· Public
preference on housing mix would be taken into account in formulating the development options for
residential development in the PDAs to meet the public
aspiration for a coherent and harmonious community. |
|
Transportation
Network |
· It was generally agreed to improve the external
connectivity of Tung Chung with the other parts of Hong Kong and better
internal connectivity of Tung Chug with TCE, TCW and the villages. · Additional MTR station in TCW to serve Yat Tung
Estate and the future population was requested. · More transport types and services were suggested
to reduce transportation cost and to support the population growth of Tung
Chung. |
· Better connectivity of Tung Chung with the other
parts of Hong Kong as well as within Tung Chung would be taken into consideration in planning vehicular
and pedestrian links in various development options. · Provision of new MTR stations would
be explored with relevant government
departments and the MTR. |
|
Community
Facilities |
·
More and
fairer distribution of community and recreational facilities, particularly
hospitals, medical care facilities, sports grounds and wet markets in TCE and
TCW was requested. ·
It was
suggested to develop resorts/ hotels/ villas and eco-tourist facilities such
as ecological parks and organic farms. ·
The Tritons
Triathlon Club requested on improvement and extension of the existing cycle
tracks to Sunny Bay. |
· Suggestions on types and distribution of various
community facilities would be
carefully considered in formulating the development schemes for a balanced
and sustainable community. · The feasibility of improving the existing cycle
tracks within the vicinity of the Project would be examined. |
|
Ecology and
Environment |
·
There were
grave concerns about the possible adverse impacts of development on the
ecology and the environment of Tung Chung Stream and Tung Chung Bay. ·
It was
suggested to promote eco-tourism and environmental education in TCW. ·
There were
concerns about traffic noise caused by roads, e.g. the North Lantau Highway
and by transport facilities e.g. the Airport Express to the residents. |
· The possible impact on ecologically sensitive
areas and on the environment such as on air quality and residential dwellings
would be critically
assessed and minimised in the EIA. Areas proven to be ecologically sensitive would
be protected against undue influence/
disturbance. |
|
Cultural
Heritage |
·
It was
agreed to preserve the declared monuments, graded historical buildings and
rural villages for their educational and tourism purposes. ·
Ma Wan Chung
was proposed for preservation and revitalisation. The existing fishing
village was proposed to be developed into a Fisherman’s Wharf. ·
Preservation
of the Prajna Dhyana Temple at Shek Mun Kap was requested. |
· Prajna Dhyana Temple, other declared monuments
and places of high cultural heritage values such as Ma Wan Chung Fishing
Village would be preserved
in the development options. |
|
Economic
Development |
·
Theme park
development is preferred to increase job and business opportunities for local
residents. ·
Promotion of
commercial and tourism uses with the development, e.g. hotel/ resort centres,
water sports centres, flea markets, marina and fisherman’s wharf was
suggested. |
· Provision of local employment and business
opportunities and the possibility of tourism development would
be examined in formulating the
various development options. |
2.3.2.3
Views and
suggestions received in Stage 1 PE served as an important basis for formulating
the initial land use options that were promulgated for public discussion and
comments under the Stage 2 PE.
Summary
of Stage 2 PE
2.3.2.4
All the
comments collated during Stage 1 PE were duly considered and where appropriate
incorporated into the development of initial land use options, which were put
forward to consultation in Stage 2 PE.
Similar to the Stage 1 PE, a series of events of different types had
been conducted. Roving exhibitions at four locations, a community workshop, a
public forum, 17 numbers of focus group meetings, and meetings with statutory
advisory bodies had been conducted during the Stage 2 PE which commenced in May
2013 and completed in July 2013. A total
of 3,099 submissions were received through various channels. The key purposes of the Stage 2 PE were to
present the initial land use options and to invite stakeholders to offer their
specific views on them. Key views collated during this Stage 2 PE are
summarised below.
Table 2.5 Summary of key comments and approaches adopted to address comments collated in Stage 2 PE
|
Elements |
Key Comments |
Responses |
|
Development Needs and Planning |
· It
was generally agreed to proceed with the further development in Tung Chung to
revitalise the local economy and to stimulate economic growth, despite
firstly to address the existing problems in Tung Chung (e.g. lack of good
connectivity, community facilities, job opportunities, etc.). · There
were requests from the public for sustainable development of the Tung Chung
expansion under a holistic approach, better integration of the East and West,
capitalisation on the geographic bridgehead location of Tung Chung and
reinvigoration of the economic vibrancy of Tung Chung. · Besides housing development, Tung Chung extension should also focus on commercial and tourism growth. · The public agreed on the need for a balanced housing mix. ·
The public urged for a better building design and
avoidance of any possible “wall-effect” residential development especially along
the coastal area. The key stepped building design, view corridor inclusions
were largely supported and welcomed. ·
The population targets should be reviewed in
order not to overload the carrying capacity of the existing infrastructure. |
· The
public’s request for sustainable development matched with the planning and design
principles for the Initial Options and the Preferred Option. · The
draft RODP will maintain a strong and diversified commercial component and will
take into account the opportunities brought by the bridgehead economy and complimentary
development proposals around. · The
draft RODP will ensure the provision and distributions of
community facilities are well designed; with a housing ratio in-line with
policy direction, and adopting a socially inclusive and human-scale
design in the Preferred Option. · The
proposed 14ha reclamation in Tung Chung West, has been abandoned; the
ecologically-sensitive areas of Tung Chung Valley, Tung Chung
Bay, Tai Ho etc. has been carefully planned and be the key areas of concern
in the preparation of the Preferred Option. · To
provide a balanced land use provision in the PDAs, less than 40% of the
proposed land use will be for residential purpose. The remaining will be used
for open space, conservation related use, G/IC use, commercial use, existing
village, roads and utilities etc. · A
total of about 853,000m2 commercial Gross Floor Area (GFA) has
been proposed with office, retail and hotel component to ensure economic
vibrancy and capture the opportunities with surrounding developments. · The
draft RODP has taken into account the latest direction recommended
by the Long Term Housing Strategy for a 60:40 housing mix for the PDAs to
cater for the territorial need regarding the public to private housing mix. · Urban
design principles raised by public are in-line with that for the draft RODP.
Stepping height from inland towards waterfront will be maintained. ·
Reference has been made according to the latest
Sustainable Building Design Guidelines and Urban Design Guidelines in the
preparation of draft RODP to avoid “wall effect” developments along the
coastal area as far as possible. Quality design would be pursued in order to
achieve a pleasant townscape. ·
The future capacity of infrastructures has been
reviewed and it would be able to support future population increase. |
|
Tung Chung East |
· Majority of stakeholders support the proposed development on the Tung Chung East reclamation area, and the high-density development near the core area or around the transportation hubs. · Stakeholders’ concerns included environmental impact during construction, visual impact of the new development on reclaimed area, impact on ecology in Tai Ho Inlet, cumulative impact on marine ecology and Chinese White Dolphin, narrowing of the navigation channel, impact on water flow near Tai Ho Inlet, etc. There was also suggestions to reduce the extent of reclamation in Tung Chung East. · There are diverse views on the need, scale and location of the marina proposed. Most stakeholders believed that marina development would only benefit the affluent minority while others considered that marina could enhance the economy of Tung Chung and make Tung Chung a more interesting recreation and tourism destination. |
· The draft RODP would adopt a transit-oriented development approach for high-density development proposed to be within the catchment area of the TCE MTR Station to maximise convenience provided by public transport. A Public Transport Interchange is also proposed near the Station to further enhance the role as a transportation hub at the Metro Core. · The establishment of reclamation in TCE is supported by technical assessments, and has already taken into account various public concerns such as marine ecology, Chinese White Dolphin etc. Environmental concerns will be carefully assessed and countered with mitigation measures, if necessary, in the EIA process. · Visual impact will be avoided by designation of planning and design measures such as visual corridors and other special requirements for areas with interface with existing development in Tung Chung. · Given
some public concern on the potential impact for the proposed marina to the Tai
Ho Inlet, the marina is proposed to be relocated from the eastern-end of the TCE
reclamation to the northern-tip of the reclamation. The scale of the marina has
also been reduced from 350 boats to 95 boats. · It
has been confirmed that the proposed location of marina on the draft RODP
will not affect the navigation channel to the north of the TCE
reclamation. The proposed marina and its
clubhouse facilities would be incorporated into the design of
the waterfront promenade and the waterfront park, as well as to synergise with the
adjacent retail and hotel facilities to form a vibrant commercial hub at this northern
part of TCE. |
|
Tung Chung West |
· Majority
of the public opposed the proposed reclamation in TCW. · The
public were concerned about the adverse ecological impact on nearby Tung
Chung Bay and the impact of water flow which would deteriorate the current
odour problem near Ma Wan Chung by the proposed reclamation. · Private
housing development near Tung Chung Town Park was objected. · The
public generally supported the revitalisation of Ma Wan Chung village. · For the
Tung Chung Valley, there are conflicting views towards its future development
in that the local villagers and land owners would like to have more
development opportunities whilst green groups, religious practitioner/operator
and individual members of the public prefer to maintain the existing rural
and countryside setting of the valley. Nevertheless, majority of the public
generally agree on the need for a balanced housing mix in TCW. · Coral
Ching Limited, villagers, Island District Council and some other stakeholders
suggested the government to explore and develop all available fallow
agricultural land instead of carrying out reclamation for more developable
land. · There are
mixed views on the future plot ratio for TCW development. ·
The Buddhist Navigation Vihara proposed to
develop TCW into a new recreational tourist spots under the theme with
Buddhism characteristics, and zone the area around Prajna Dhyana Temple as
G/IC and to retain the existing view from the temple. They also had plans to
provide community services such as elderly care and to promote organic
farming. ·
Green Groups were concerned that the areas with
high ecological values would be adversely affected by the human activities
arising from nearby developments and urged for preservation of the important
ecological assets including Tung Chung Stream, Tung Chung Bay etc. |
· The draft RODP abandoned the 14ha reclamation in TCW in response to the public objections. · Infrastructural support would be provided to facilitate Ma Wan Chung village revitalisation. · The detailed design of the draft RODP has taken into account of the villagers’ comments and the areas having potential for agricultural uses are proposed for designation as “Agriculture” zone. · Development in areas with conservation value, landscape value, agricultural potential, and existing village settlements are eliminated; and conservation of precious features would be taken into account when determining the proposed land use and development intensity in Tung Chung Valley. ·
Areas with development potentials in Tung Chung
Valley has been further reviewed and has proposed two additional plots of
land (total approx. 3ha) to the west of the TC Stream (to the north and south
of Nim Yuen) for low-rise development. ·
For development intensity in Tung Chung Valley,
development in the areas with conservation value, landscape value,
agricultural potential and existing village settlements will be avoided. New
developments will take into account the conservation of precious features in
the valley. ·
PR6 and PR5 Public Housing Sites have been
proposed along Tung Chung Road to maximise the efficiency of TCW MTR station. ·
A re-arrangement of land use around Prajna Dhyana
Temple has been in response to comments on development around Prajna Dhyana
Temple. ·
Based on the RODP, statutory plan(s) will be
prepared to provide planning framework to guide the remaining development in
Tung Chung. |
|
Community Facility Provision |
·
The public generally considered that the
facilities were not evenly distributed in Tung Chung East and West, in
particular, the locals pointed out that community facilities in Tung Chung
West (e.g. Yat Tung Estate) were seriously lacking. ·
The public requested for a balanced community
facilities provisions in both Tung Chung East and Tung Chung West for the
youth, the elderly and the ethnic minorities, for more recreation, leisure,
civic amenities and all levels of education land uses. ·
There were suggestions on the location of sports
ground to be located between TCE and TCW. ·
Educational parties and groups advised additional
conventional primary and secondary schools may lead to over-provision of
classes. More tertiary education facilities, schools for other uses and
school for special needs students could be considered. |
·
The draft RODP has carefully examined and
proposed an appropriate provision of G/IC facilities, recreation facilities
and open space to serve the existing and planned population. ·
Sports centres are planned at centre of
population and/or incorporated within the open space network in both TCE and
TCW to ensure the highest accessibility for future users. ·
To improve connectivity, the connected waterfront
promenade, cycling track and extension of Tung Chung Line could improve the
mobility for residents in TCW to other community facilities in the PDAs. ·
Wet markets in Public Housing Sites would be
considered / planned by Housing Authority where appropriate in the
future development. Flea markets/ night market could be provided within the
existing/ planned open space in PDAs on application to LCSD. ·
Land has been
reserved for GIC facilities (one in
TCE and one in TCW) such as social
welfare facilities or other
community / government facilities and services, if necessary. ·
Policy support from relevant bureaux would be required
for the demand religious facilities. Other community facilities such as
library, G/IC facilities for youth and elderly etc. have made reference to
the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG) standards and
confirmation with relevant government departments on the special requirement
relative to Tung Chung’s context. ·
The draft RODP has paid particular attention to
encourage local shops by careful planning and design. ·
Regarding education facilities, the provision of
primary and secondary school facilities have been reviewed based on the
latest information from the Education Bureau. Land for tertiary institutes
and other school uses has also been reserved in the draft RODP. |
|
Traffic and
Transportation |
· There was acute need to upgrade the transportation
and connectivity within the new town and to better connect with other parts
of Hong Kong. The sole reliance on rail development would not be adequate. ·
Residents of
the existing villages claimed that the existing road connection between the village areas and to Tung Chung town
was generally insufficient, and strongly
requested for well-planned local transportation system for better connectivity. ·
It was
suggested to provide cycling path to connect all areas within Tung Chung. ·
The public
were concerned about the existing rail and road capacity might not be
sufficient to cope with the proposed population and requested for detailed
capacity study before deciding the target population extension. ·
The Airport
Authority Hong Kong (AAHK) recommended investigating the feasibility of a spur line allowing an airport
shuttle train service to be run between Tung Chung East and Hong Kong
International Airport Station via the existing Airport
Express Line. ·
There were
other public suggestions such as considering implementation of electrification of the transportation system and
green-road infrastructures to connect
to the tourist facilities to develop Tung Chung into a green city for sustainable living and transportation, making use
of the seven existing piers, developing
a monorail system to improve the connectivity between Tung Chung and other parts in Hong Kong, etc. |
·
Traffic assessment has been conducted which
indicates that the future rail and road capacity is sufficient to cope with
the proposed increase in population. ·
The draft RODP has taken into account the public
comments to provide rural roads to connect the various existing villages
within TC Valley, to enhance the convenience and safety of local residents. ·
The draft RODP has proposed a comprehensive cycling
network within whole Tung Chung. ·
Liaison with Airport Authority Hong Kong (AAHK)
would be continued on their latest development proposal on the North
Commercial District (NCD) on the airport island and the shuttle train service
via the Airport Express Line would be considered by the relevant
bureau/departments on its feasibility. ·
Various green initiatives, e.g. green linear park
with cycling track connection,
central park etc. has been considered in the development plan. The existing
pier within Tung Chung will also be maintained. ·
To encourage the use of railway as the key
development principle for transit-oriented development, the draft RODP has
been formulated with high density clustered near to the proposed railway stations.
Residents further away from railway station would be well-connected by linear
parks extending from the metro-core area penetrating to the rest of the
reclamation in TCE. The entire PDAs would be well-served by a well-planned
public transport system (and PTIs) and cycle track to ensure mobility. ·
Monorail system is not proposed since it will
take up much land space, impose possible noise nuisance and possibly
sterilize land around the alignment for residential purpose, which violate
the key intentions of the Project which is to optimize land for providing
residential unit and commercial space to serve the development need in the
territory. |
|
Environment |
·
The majority
of the public agreed on the preservation of the natural environment and protection of the high ecological value areas
in TCW. ·
The public urged for the conservation of Tung Chung Stream
(including the channelized section)
and Tung Chung Bay, as the areas are regarded by the public as sites of high ecological value. ·
The
conservation boundary was commented as not large enough. ·
Majority of the public opposed the reclamation in
TCW, since they were concerned about the reclamation and subsequent
development would cause adverse impact on water and air quality. ·
Green Groups expressed their concern about the
impact on Chinese White Dolphins due to reclamation works, especially the
cumulative effects with the on-going reclamation works on the marine life and
their habitats. The Conservancy Association demanded for a comprehensive
report on the cumulative impacts on marine habitat by all concurrent
projects. |
· The draft RODP has been refined with
consideration on conservation of the natural environment and high ecological
value features in TCW. Most
of the conservation features, such as a Conservation Area (CA) zone along the
river channel, Green Belt (GB)
for more mature woodland areas would be retained. ·
Ecological
surveys in the TCW has been updated throughout the Project in refining the
important areas for conservation for refinement of the draft RODP, in particular, the proposed GB zone in the Fong Yuen
area has been proposed to be enlarged
southwards to protect the living habitat of the rare butterfly species. In addition, a comprehensive EIA Study has been
conducted in parallel in confirming/ detailing the conservation boundaries
for the PDAs and to ensure
the impact of the development could satisfy the corresponding statutory criteria, such as air quality, noise, water
quality, ecology, etc. ·
The 14ha
reclamation in TCW has been removed having considered the green concern about
the ecological sensitivity of coastal area and estuary of Tung Chung Stream. ·
Based on
Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) long-term
monitoring data of CWD, the proposed reclamation area in Tung Chung was
outside the habitat for CWD. ·
The government has commissioned a separate consultancy
to assess the cumulative impact of several
potential developments in western waters on various key aspects including the CWD |
|
Cultural
Heritage |
·
It is
strongly agreed that preservation of the local cultural heritage such as Hau Wong Temple, Tung Chung Fort, Tung Chung Battery
and the local villages would be essential.
There were suggestions on incorporation of these assets as part of a cultural tourism programme or within a wider
tourism plan. In particular, revitalisation
of Ma Wan Chung Village was suggested. |
·
The initial
land use options presented in PE2 were consistent with public aspirations towards preservation of local cultural heritage
in Tung Chung. Future development
would respect and would not affect existing heritage features such as Hau Wong Temple, Tung Chung Fort, Tung Chung Battery,
as well as Fu Tei Wan Kiln,
Tung Chung Game Board Carving on the town park hill etc. Consideration has been made to ensure compatibility of future
development with these heritage features,
e.g. view corridors would be retained in front of cultural heritages such as
Hau Wong Temple, Tung Chung Battery,
Shek Mun Kap Entrance Gate etc. ·
Development
intensity of future development has been carefully considered to ensure harmony with the character of rural
villages in the Tung Chung Valley. ·
The
potential for enhancing connectivity of these
heritage features, which is integral to the character of Tung Chung, and the integration with the proposed cycling network
would be studied. ·
Infrastructural
support would be proposed to facilitate Ma Wan Chung Village revitalisation. |
|
Tourism
Development |
·
The public
agreed that Tung Chung has great potential in
developing tourism which could bring enormous economic benefits and create
ample opportunities for both Tung Chung and Hong Kong. More facilities such
as hotels, commercial premises and shopping malls would needed to facilitate
tourism development. ·
Connectivity
in Tung Chung should be enhanced to
cope with the future visitors in the area. |
· The draft RODP would retain a major office node
with retail components within the PDAs, which could complement the latest
development proposals for hotel and retail developments in the North
Commercial District on the Airport Island and potential retail facilities on
the HKBCF. The proposed marina and adjacent commercial uses at the northern
tip of the TCE reclamation would also create other tourism attractions and a
vibrant hub for Tung Chung. · Opportunities for leisure tours/ eco-toursim has
been considered in the draft RODP given the unique character of TCW area
which possessed a rich and diversified natural/ scenic/ cultural assets. ·
Together
with the intention for a comprehensive cycling network and generously designed linear open space network in Tung Chung,
it is intended to link up these various
tourism features within the PDAs with the exiting tourism facilities (such as Citygate Mall, the Ngong Ping Cable car)
to further consolidate Tung Chung’s
tourism role in North Lantau. |
|
Job
Opportunities and Local Economy |
·
It has been
suggested that Tung Chung has significant locational advantage due to close proximity to various future major infrastructure
developments, and should be developed
as a Bridgehead Economic Zone to capture this opportunity and improve local economy. ·
The public
has opined that Tung Chung has great potential of developing into a business centre, the MICE market and this could
be well integrated with the development
of HZMB and HKIA. ·
Connectivity
in Tung Chung should be enhanced
so as to cope with the future HZMB and the exhibition visitors in the area. ·
The public
pointed out that many Tung Chung residents were unemployed due to mis-match in the skillsets needed in the area.
The public called for more diverse job
opportunities in Tung Chung that could match the local skillsets. |
·
Having
reviewed the latest developments / proposals in Lantau, a diversified
commercial provision in the PDAs has been maintained, which could respond to
public comments regarding the provision of additional job opportunities in
terms of quantity and diversity. ·
In the draft
RODP, more focus would be put on the provision of
office component to form a “major office node” in Tung Chung (500,000m2
GFA). A regional retail
component (155,000m2 GFA) that is complimentary to surrounding
retail proposals such as North Commercial
District (NCD) and the potential retail development
on the HKBCF island; as well as the same provision of a 1000-room hotel
(50,000m2 GFA) in the PDAs would be maintained.
With the operation of the Third Runway of
the HKIA, together with several other developments being constructed or
planned in North Lantau, the job
diversity in the wider area is anticipated to be increased. ·
Together
with the provision of various
local retail activities to serve the residents, future job provision from the PDAs is estimated to be more than 40,000. ·
Regarding
the concerns on mis-match of skillsets, educational areas for territory
institutes and other school uses have been proposed that could provide the
opportunity for vocational / tertiary training
that is specialised for the employment opportunities
in the area. |
2.3.2.6
The Study team
analysed and evaluated all comments received during PE2 and formulated a draft
RODP for the Project. The draft RODP had been promulgated for further
discussion and comments under PE3.
Summary
of Stage 3 PE
2.3.2.7
All the
comments and opinions collated during Stage 2 PE were duly considered and where
appropriate incorporated into the formulation of draft RODP which was put
forward for consultant in Stage 3 PE. Roving exhibitions at seven locations,
physical model displays at five locations, a public forum and 25 numbers of focus
group meetings were held. Consultation
with statutory advisory bodies including the Islands District Council, Town
Planning Board, Planning Sub-Committee of the Land and Development Advisory
Committee and Airport Authority Hong Kong were also held, and an information centre had been set up to
provide information to the public during the Stage 3 PE which commenced in August
2014 and completed in October 2014. A total of 4,086 public submissions were
received through various means, including individual submissions, standard
submissions and signature campaigns. The key purposes of the Stage 3 PE were to
present the draft RODP that had incorporated the comments collated from Stage 2
PE as appropriate, and invite further comments from the stakeholders. A summary
of the key comments received and the approaches adopted to address those
comments are summarised in Table 2.6.
Table 2.6 Summary of key comments and approaches adopted to address comments collated in Stage 3 PE
|
Elements |
Key Comments |
Approaches Adopted to
Address Comments |
|
Land
Uses |
General |
|
|
· The
proposed land uses should balance the specific needs of the residents in each
area, while avoiding conflicting land uses between daily living purposes and
tourism development. ·
A stakeholder proposed an extension of the covered walkway linking
Tung Chung Centre and Tung Chung North to other new development area. They suggested that the waterfront area
could be used for commercial, recreational, cultural and educational
purposes, and that public access to waterfront events should be encouraged.
The organisation also suggested having more diversified forms of open space. ·
During the PE3 Public Forum, the Expert Panel expressed their
concerns of maintaining a balance between the development of different land
uses and aspects of the community. They also expressed the importance of
resolving conflicts between different land uses in the planning process. |
· Provision
of open space and government, institution or community (GIC) facilities
in the RODP has been designed in accordance with HKPSG and taking into account
valuable comments received in PE3. The proposed waterfront promenade in the
RODP concurs with some public comments requesting a linkage between the
existing TCNT and the PNTEAs. In particular, some residential plots along the
DO are required for street-facing shop fronts and certain area near
waterfront (in both TCE and TCW) are provided with commercial
facilities to encourage activities and vibrancy and allow the area to become
a focal point for residential activities in the future. · Pedestrian
networks and linear parks have also been designed to encourage public access
to the waterfront. |
|
|
Tung
Chung Town Centre |
||
|
·
NGO/ local community groups suggested Area 1, 2, 3 should be used as
transport terminals and parking areas for coaches, and Area 52 as public
leisure space. ·
A stakeholder objected to the proposed change of land use from
District Open Space and Education to Residential (Group A) site, and said
Area 29 should be best used as a town park for public enjoyment. Both Lotlink
Development Ltd. and Full Fame Development Limited opposed to the residential
development on Area 29 due to its natural hilly terrain, and opined that
since Area 23 was a suitable site for high-density development, therefore the
change of land use to District Open Space and Education was not justified. |
· Comments
relating to existing Tung Chung Town Centre have been conveyed to the
relevant department for considerations. · Land use
review on the draft RODP has been carried out with respect of public and
relevant government departmental comments as well as planning and engineering
considerations. Residential uses with various density and stepped building
height have been have been incorporated. |
|
|
Tung
Chung East |
||
|
·
NGO/ local community groups suggested having more leisure spaces with
local characteristics in Tung Chung East and opined that the education land
use should be more balanced within Tung Chung East, while suggesting a review
on the location and scale of the proposed education land use and nearby road
network. The organisation also opined that the underground area of Tung Chung
East could be better utilised. ·
Stakeholders in
general supported the RODP for Tung Chung East, which utilised the concept of
transport-oriented development. |
· Provision
of open space and design of the road network have been designated on the RODP
in accordance with HKPSG, and taking into account valuable comments received
in PE3. The RODP has also reviewed the provision of education land use with
consultation of the Education Bureau, the provision of primary schools and
secondary schools has been revised and six primary and two secondary schools
are reserved in RODP. Besides, in our
RODP, we have also assumed an efficient use of underground area of TCE and
TCW by assuming car-parks serving the residential and commercial uses of the
PNTEAs to be placed at underground to reduce building bulk and enhance
ventilation. · Regarding
the possible overlapping issue with current OZP for part of the
north-eastern area of Tung Chung, the Study Team has reviewed the overlapped
area of the existing TC OZP and our revised RODP and proposed an appropriate
zoning that meets the latest need. |
|
|
Tung
Chung West |
||
|
·
Varied comments were received in regard to the land uses in Tung
Chung West. The revised land uses near Prajna Dhyana Temple in Shek Mun Kap
was generally appreciated. For the proposed land uses in Tung Chung West,
most comments were related to the designation of areas for conservation, such
as GB or CA zonings. |
· In
principle, the land uses (e.g. residential, GIC, CA, CPA, GB, etc.) in TCW in
the RODP are proposed and taken into consideration of various factors,
including urban planning, local demand for housing/infrastructure/facilities,
existing sensitive natural environment, findings of ecological survey,
environmental impact, comments received from various stages of public
engagement activities, etc. The proposal aims to strike a balance between
these various aspects. |
|
|
·
NGO/ local community groups suggested zoning parts of Tung Chung
west, (e.g. fung shui woods) as Conservation Area/ GB; suggested designating
the two areas on the bank of the Tung Chung Stream near Fong Yuen and Shek
Mun Kap as conservation area and GB to protect the natural environment and
the habitats for butterflies. ·
However, NGO/ local community
groups also objected to designating GB and Conservation Area zonings on the
bank of Tung Chung Stream, especially for the village area in Tung Chung West
around Lam Che and Nim Yuen. The Committee suggested changing the land use of
the two places around Lam Che and Nim Yuen from GB and R4 site to
“Government, Institution or Communities”. Some villagers requested that
suitable compensation should be paid if private land was to be zoned for
conservation purpose. |
· In
principle, the land uses (e.g. residential, GIC, CA, CPA, GB, etc.) in TCW in
the RODP are proposed and taken into consideration of various factors,
including urban planning, local demand for housing/infrastructure/facilities,
existing sensitive natural environment, findings of ecological survey,
environmental impact, comments received the various stages of public
engagement activities, etc. The proposal aims to strike a balance between
these various aspects. Appropriate conservation and protection
considerations have been included in the proposed zonings of the RODP (e.g.
CA, CPA, GB etc). Some area north of Ngau Au Village,
which was proposed as “GB” in the draft RODP will be revised to low-rise
residential use (“R4” zone, PR1) to optimize land of comparatively lower
ecological value for an acceptable degree of development in the Tung Chung
Valley. This additional residential site in the TC Valley is proposed to
maintain a low development intensity to maximize compatibility with the
surrounding context. · The
existing use of the land or the agricultural use would not be affected by the
conservation related uses. |
|
|
·
There were different opinions on whether the fung shui woods in Tung
Chung west should be zoned as GB or Conservation Area, and NGO/ local
community groups pointed out that there should be consistency in this regard.
Concern was also raised about private land being zoned for conservation, and
suggested designating it as a park managed by the Leisure and Cultural
Services Department (LCSD) under the Pleasure Ground Ordinance and a park
managed by the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) under
the Country Park Ordinance, or as land swap or resumption with compensation. ·
NGO/ local community groups requested the designation of R3 site near
Shek Mun Kap as Natural Park. ·
There was also opinion regarding emphasis on both village type
development and environmental conservation in the development of Tung Chung
West. ·
Specific comments on land uses were also received from different
organisations and villages. In this regards, NGO/ local community groups considered
that abandoned farmlands should be used as green spaces or for community and
residential purposes. ·
For rural development, Wong Nai Uk village requested for expansion of
the “Village Type Development” (“V”) zone to meet their future small house
demand. ·
Mok Ka Village opposed to any development carried out in the village
and suggested moving the R3 development near the village eastward, adding
that the agricultural area should also be maintained. They criticised that
the village boundary shown in the map was incorrect, and suggested extending
the boundary for future rural development. ·
NGO/ local community groups expressed grave concern on the future use
of the piece of land in front of Hau Wong Temple. They advised that the land
should be used for traditional festival celebrations and/or religious
functions. The organisation also suggested changing the land use of the two
places around Lam Che and Nim Yuen from GB and R4 site to GIC land use. ·
A stakeholder suggested removing the non-building area in Tung Chung
West, and rezoning the two plots of R4 land near the Tung Chung West MTR
Station as R3 with an aim to maximising the development potential in Tung
Chung Valley, and changing the proposed zoning of the western side of the
estuary of Tung Chung Stream from GB to Government, Institution or
Communities or recreational use. ·
A private sector opposed the proposal to designate the surrounding
area of Nim Yuen Village as GB as it acted against the villagers’ will and
development plans. ·
A private sector suggested a revised planning of the neighbourhood of
Tung Chung West MTR Station, which involved the designation of an OU (Mixed
use) zoning and a civic centre with the application of TOD to create a
vibrant district centre. |
· Regarding
the proposal of setting up a Nature Park on the proposed “R3” site north of
Shek Mun Kap, it is considered that R3 site is an area with a relatively
lower ecological value and it is one
of the limited available flat land in Tung Chung West suitable for
residential development, and therefore retaining it as “R3” is appropriate. · In
response to the comments about the zoning for the fung shui wood, the zoning
designated on the RODP is based on ecological survey results. Moreover, the
proposed “GB” and “CA” zone along the TC Stream is based on the findings of
ecological survey and consultation with the relevant Government department
and is considered appropriate and therefore retained on the RODP. · Regarding
the public comment to change the land use around Lam Che and Nim Yuen from
“GB” and “R4” to G/IC uses, the “R4” site is one of the limited
available land in Tung Chung West that is suitable for residential
development and there are no other solid proposals for what type of G/IC
facilities to be developed at the location, therefore it is considered
appropriate to retain the proposed zoning as in the draft RODP. Area around
Nim Yuen and Lam Che mainly consists of fung shui woods, shrubland and
grassland, and therefore it is considered that the “GB” zone should be
retained for conservation purpose. · Regarding
the suggestion for a civic centre/ art venue near the TCW station along the
waterfront, it is understood that a civic centre/ art venue/ town hall has
already been planned in Tung Chung Area 1 (near the existing TC
Station). Nevertheless, in the RODP,
with the removal of 1 sports centre near the TCW station (taking
into account the planned IRC near Area 39), the area north of the “R3” Site
west of Yat Tung will be converted to a larger “DO” with a view towards the
Tung Chung Bay. It is intended that the design of the “DO” should include
facilities such as an ampitheatre to create vibrancy and encourage the use of
the “DO” for TCW residents. · The areas near proposed TCW railway station are
carefully planned. By adopting TOD concept, higher density of residential
sites and some local commercial uses are located near the proposed TCW
railway station. On the other hand, low-density
development is maintained nearby the Hau Wong Temple to maximize compatibility. Same as the draft RODP presented
in the PE3, there will be no development in front of the Hau Wong Temple so
as to maintain an open view and the “DO” area in front of the temple can
accommodate the need for holding traditional functions. · Apart
from the above, some minor refinement has been made to include the entire
coastline above high water mark as CPA
zone near the Sha Tsui Tau area. |
|
|
Ecology and Environment |
General |
|
|
· It
was generally agreed that the biodiversity and natural environment of Tung
Chung should be preserved. Many expressed the hope that its natural scenery,
environment and wildlife habitats could be maintained when considering the
proposed future development nearby. · NGO/
local community groups urged in their joint submission for a designated Sites
of Special Scientific Interest in the areas that are ecologically valuable in
Tung Chung West and also opined that the cumulative impact brought by
surrounding large-scale infrastructure developments should not be
underestimated. They also urged the Government to explain the measures
dealing with cumulative environmental impacts arising from nearby projects
and the standards of conservation zones proposed in the area. · NGO/
local community groups requested both in their respective submissions and the
joint submission that Tung Chung West should be covered by Development
Permission Area (DPA) Plan to control the human activities and possible
environmental disturbance in the area. · NGO/
local community groups were concerned about the disturbance on the living
environment of ecologically important species due to the development, and
opined that valuable natural habitats should be protected. · Regarding
Construction and Demolition (C&D) waste from future development, NGO/
local community groups opined that land transport of construction materials
should be prioritised to minimise marine traffic and they suggested the
collection and transportation of C&D wastes should be carried out in
appropriate locations. |
· The
Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP) has been formulated based on
urban design consideration and taken into account the findings of ecological
survey. Appropriate conservation and protection considerations have been
included in the proposed zonings of the RODP (e.g. CA, CPA, GB, etc.). · Regarding
the concern about C&D waste and cumulative impact due to surrounding
large-scale infrastructure developments, appropriate construction methods and
necessary mitigation measures have been formulated and included in the EIA,
which has taken into consideration of the on-going and committed projects to
ensure the impacts will be acceptable. · Regarding
Green Group’s request for a DPA plan, the request was studied and statutory
plans would be prepared to provide the statutory framework to guide the
remaining development in Tung Chung. · A
new initiative to implement District Cooling System (DCS) in Tung Chung is
being considered. The way forward is yet to be confirmed. Should
the initiative is to be put forward in future, the DCS will be implemented
under separate project subject to further study. |
|
|
Tung Chung Stream, Tung Chung Bay and
surrounding areas |
||
|
· There
is a general support for the conservation of Tung Chung Stream and Tung Chung
Bay, with impact of nearby development to be minimised as much as possible. · A
group submission by NGO/ local community groups focused on the environmental
and ecological impacts brought by the proposed development along Tung Chung
Stream and Tung Chung Bay. They urged the Government to further protect the
ecology, riverbanks, estuary and the water quality of the Tung Chung Stream
and Tung Chung Bay from impacts from nearby residential development. Some
suggested that education and scientific research could be conducted in Tung
Chung West. · In
the joint submission, NGO/ local community groups opined that to protect the
natural environment of Tung Chung Stream and Tung Chung Stream system, it was
necessary to avoid channelisation, civil engineering works and human
activities that could pollute the courses and banks of Tung Chung Stream and
estuary and the entire Tung Chung Bay. They also requested the
de-channelisation/rehabilitation of the channelised parts of Tung Chung
Stream, and a careful consideration on any proposed development in Tung Chung
Valley in order to protect the habitat in Tung Chung Stream. · Proposal
from the NGO/ local community groups urged for more refined measures for
protecting Tung Chung Stream, particularly around the Sites of Special
Scientific Interest along the River, Tung Chung Bay and Wong Lung Hang.
De-channelisation/rehabilitation of the channelised parts of Tung Chung
Stream was also called for. · NGO/
local community groups also suggested de-channelisation/rehabilitation of the
channelised parts of Tung Chung Stream, and maintaining sufficient vegetation
cover and proper land use planning. They also supported conducing education
and scientific research in Tung Chung West. · On
the measures that could be implemented to protect Tung Chung Stream and the
surrounding areas, NGO/ local community groups suggested zoning Tung Chung
Stream and the riparian zones as Conservation Area to protect the local
ecology and also proposed zoning of an area near Ma Wan Chung (where no
zoning was shown in the draft RODP) into CPA zone to protect the mangroves
from incompatible development. · NGO/
local community groups proposed a conservation along the Tung Chung Stream to
protect the local ecosystem and also opined that the riparian zone of Tung
Chung Stream could be protected by land resumption. They also pointed out the
necessity of having an enhanced protection of the remaining marshes and
agricultural areas in Tung Chung Valley, demolishing suspected illegal
bridges and having more effective restoration plans and that zoning should be
done on the part of the Tung Chung Stream near Shek Lau Po. · NGO/
local community groups opined that control of human activities should be
exercised in addition to proper protection measures to avoid extinction of
specific species. |
· The
Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP) has been formulated based on the
findings of ecological survey. Appropriate conservation and protection
considerations have been included in the proposed zonings of the development
proposal (e.g. CA, CPA, GB, etc.). To further minimize the risk of polluting
Tung Chung Stream by nearby human activities, appropriate drainage and sewage
system have been designed and provided under the development. · The
mangrove area near Tung Chung Bay has now been zoned as Coastal Protection
Area (CPA) under the RODP. · De-channelisation/rehabilitation
of the existing channelised sections of Tung Chung Stream is proposed and
these sections will form part of the proposed River Park for environmental
enhancement, eco-education and recreational use. |
|
|
Reclamation |
||
|
· Deletion
of the previously proposed reclamation in TCW during PE2 and preservation of
the Tung Chung Stream and Tung Chung Bay were generally supported. · While
there was no major objection to the proposed reclamation in TCE and Road P1, a
private sector opined that the water body between the Airport Island and Tung
Chung should be left open to tidal flushing. · Some
concern groups expressed worries about the potential direct and indirect
ecological impact due to reclamation (e.g. construction vessels using the
water outside, etc.). In particular, NGO/ local community groups pointed out
that the habitats of Chinese White Dolphins would likely be affected by the
proposed marina on the reclamation area in Tung Chung East and also the
nearby development projects. · Regarding
the necessity of reclamation, NGO/ local community groups urged the
Government to better utilise the land resources available in the development
so that future reclamation projects would not be needed. · NGO/
local community groups also strongly urged the Government to further study
and explain the cumulative impacts of reclamation and nearby large-scale
infrastructure to surrounding areas, such as the proposed Marine Park in the
Brother Islands. · NGO/
local community groups mentioned in their joint submission that disturbance
to Chinese White Dolphins inside the protected area of Brothers Islands
Marine Park (BIMP) might be caused by the work barges and vessels from the
proposed reclamation in Tung Chung East, reducing the effectiveness of the BIMP.
They suggested that marine traffic could be minimised by exploring and
prioritising land transport of construction materials. |
· Regarding
the concerns such as water flow / water quality and direct / indirect impacts
on marine ecology (including the habitats of Chinese White Dolphins) due to
reclamation, preliminary environment assessments on the cumulative impact due
to surrounding large-scale infrastructure developments, etc., have been carried out, which indicated that
the impacts should be acceptable. Appropriate construction methods and
necessary mitigation measures have been formulated and included in the EIA,
which has taken into consideration of the on-going and committed projects to
ensure the impacts will be acceptable. |
|
|
Pollution |
||
|
· There
were concerns on the cumulative impacts on the environment, in particular
noise and air pollution, due to increased traffic generated by the proposed
developments and large-scale infrastructure projects in the area. These
concerns were raised by NGO/ local community groups, who also urged for
measures to counter the aforementioned environmental impacts. · There
were comments on the existing air quality in Tung Chung (in particular the O3
concentration) and that the proposed developments may further worsen the
situation. NGO/ local community groups were concerned about the adverse
impacts of air quality due to air pollution from the mainland and an
excessive level of ozone. · NGO/
local community groups commented on the potential impact on air quality from
cross-boundary vehicles and nearby infrastructure in the new town and were
also concerned about the increased human activities (e.g. surface run-off and
sewage from the existing villages) and their possible adverse impact on
ecologically sensitive areas in Tung Chung West. · In
terms of water pollution, NGO/ local community groups was concerned about the
impact from the proposed marina as well as the cumulative impact from nearby
development projects, pointing out that the habitats for Chinese White Dolphins
would likely be affected. |
· The
statutory Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) had been
carried out for the RODP under the EIAO, and necessary mitigation measures had
been proposed to ensure the impacts were acceptable. The statutory EIA
included individual and cumulative impacts for all key environmental aspects,
and had taken into consideration of the proposed construction methods and
mitigation measures, on-going and committed projects, etc. · To
minimize the risk of polluting Tung Chung Stream by nearby human activities,
appropriate drainage and sewage system in the form of stormwater attenuation and treatment
ponds and multi-stage sedimentation has been proposed under the
development. · With
regard to the air pollution from
mainland and excessive level of ozone, the governments of HKSAR and
Guangdong Province had drawn up the Pearl River Delta (PRD) Regional
Air Quality Management Plan (the “Management
Plan”) in 2003, under which both sides have been pursuing emission
reduction measures targeting power plants, motor vehicles and heavily
polluting industrial processes. The Special Panel on PRD Air Quality
Management and Monitoring was set up to follow up on the tasks under the
Management Plan. In November 2012, the two governments endorsed an emission reduction
plan for the Pearl River Delta region up to 2020 which
includes emission reduction targets for four major air pollutants, namely
sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX),
respirable suspended particulates (RSP) and volatile organic compounds (VOC),
for 2015 and 2020. Additional emission reduction measures are being
implemented on this basis with a view to ensure continuous improvement to the
regional air quality. Under the Management Plan, Hong Kong and Guangdong jointly
set up the PRD Regional Air Quality Monitoring
Network (the Network) in November 2005. Air monitoring
results of the Network reflected that efforts of the two sides
in implementing various emission reduction measures have been
successful over the period from 2006 to 2013. It is anticipated that
with the continuous implementation of emission reduction measures, the air
pollution problem in the region will continue to be improved. |
|
|
Drainage and flooding measures |
||
|
· NGO/
local community groups called for improvements on the sewerage and drainage
in Tung Chung West, as well as improvements on district-level storm water and
sewage drainage. · NGO/
local community groups suggested the government should formulate a long-term
and innovative drainage strategy for Tung Chung West and the resumption of
the nearby private lands in Tung Chung Stream Valley. · NGO/
local community groups called for the justification on the necessity and
effectiveness of the polders for flood prevention, an exploration on
alternative measures and a detailed ecological impact assessment. They also
called for measures to deal with water pollution and sewage issues, such as discharge
of effluents. · NGO/
local community groups were also concerned that the proposed polder scheme
will block the ecological connectivity across Tung Chung Stream. They also
mentioned that no pollution should be caused to Tung Chung Stream during the construction
of the polders, and that environmentally and ecologically compatible design
and materials should be used to keep the footprint of the polders to a
minimum, allowing wildlife to migrate across Tung Chung Valley. · NGO/
local community groups suggested other ways of preventing the effects of
flooding, such as building bypass floodways, relocating housing away from the
River and enforcement of laws to prevent illegal waste dumping and
development. They also opined that the proposed treatment facilities for
surface run-off should be carefully designed and managed, and that communal
sewer connecting the village houses in Tung Chung West was necessary. · NGO/
local community groups opined that the environmental performance of polder
system and stormwater
attenuation and treatment ponds was yet to be proven. They also
opined that Tung Chung Stream should be kept in its natural conditions and
that concrete channelling should not be done. · NGO/
local community groups supported revitalising Ma Wan Chung by improving its
sewage system. |
· The
statutory Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) had been
carried out for the RODP under the EIAO, and necessary mitigation measures
had been proposed to ensure the impacts were acceptable. The statutory EIA
included individual and cumulative impacts for all key environmental aspects,
and had taken into consideration of the proposed construction methods and
mitigation measures, on-going and committed projects, etc. · The
polder system and stormwater
attenuation and treatment ponds were proposed to minimise the
flooding risk and impact of polluted surface runoff on the Tung Chung Stream respectively.
The required extent of the polder system were supported and substantiated by
detailed modelling and design in the upcoming Design and Construction phase
of the project. The drainage and sewage within the villages had been properly
designed to ensure human activities would not cause an adverse impact on the
ecologically sensitive areas in TCW. Innovative mitigation measures in the
form of stormwater
attenuation and treatment ponds and multi-stage sedimentation had
been explored in detail. Such innovative idea has been implemented in other
countries and has been proven to be a very efficient measure. · The
Green Belt proposed in Tung Chung West can serve as ecological
passageway across the river. · A
proper sewerage system connecting to Ma Wan Chung has been proposed. |
|
|
Technical assessments |
||
|
· NGO/
local community groups urged the Government to release more data regarding technical
assessments on the environment and demographics in Tung Chung and proposed
conducting more studies for the subsequent EIA, including site-specific water
modelling study and a marine traffic impact assessment, study about the
change in water quality, the impact of the proposed marina, as well as
on-site fishery surveys and a Strategic Environment Assessment. · NGO/
local community groups suggested that technical assessments such as Marine
Traffic Impact Assessment, Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment and
assessment on the impacts of the marina on Chinese White Dolphins should be
done. · NGO/ local community groups opined that, besides air quality impact, a Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment should be conducted to evaluate the cumulative impact brought by surrounding large-scale infrastructure developments in Lantau at earlier stages of decision-making process. |
· Environmental assessments undertaken suggested that the environmental impacts complied with the required standards. The statutory EIA under the EIAO was carried out with the consideration of Tung Chung remaining development as well as all nearby projects to confirm both individual and cumulative environmental impacts are acceptable. |
|
|
Provision of Facilities |
General |
|
|
· The
public opined that more community facilities should be built in Tung Chung
with a balance of provision between Tung Chung East and Tung Chung West. The
provision of facilities should also be accessible and specific to the needs
of various groups, including the youth, elderly and ethnic minorities. The
public also urged for social inclusion and cultural diversity of the local
community. |
· Sufficient
and appropriate government and community facilities have been proposed in the
RODP in accordance with the HKPSG, under consultation with relevant
departments and stakeholders. The proposed distribution of these facilities
have also taken into account of the existing distribution and targeted for
the best accessibility to both future and existing residents of Tung Chung. |
|
|
Community facilities |
||
|
· In
general, the public asked for a balanced provision of community facilities
for different age groups. · While
supporting the idea of a balanced provision, the NGO/ local community groups also
opted for more open spaces to enhance residents’ quality of life. · One
private sector suggested that lands should be reserved for NGOs and charities
and a municipal services building operated by the Government should be built
for people in Tung Chung. · Requests
from the public and community organisations were made on the development of a
government-operated public markets and cooked food markets. There were also
requests for specific community facilities, including a city hall, childcare
and elderly centres, arts venue/theatre, clinics, and government offices. · Local
community groups also suggested that the two management companies could
operate the public facilities together. · More
sports facilities were suggested by sports related association, such as a new
rugby pitch near the proposed Tung Chung East MTR station and a multi-sports
stadium. They opined that having more sports facilities could provide diverse
recreational opportunities for the community and help develop Tung Chung into
a sports hub. · There
were suggestions for more facilities especially for ethnic minorities from
the public and organisations. They also which recommended building a hostel
and community centre operated by a charitable foundation. · A
private sector suggested reserving a place for installing plants for a town
cooling system. · The
public were cautioned against an uneven distribution, duplication and
possible waste of resources. They expressed their concerns over the proposed
clinic/healthcare centre in Tung Chung West, which would be located 500
meters away from North Lantau Hospital. · The
public was also concerned on the effect of the R2 proposed development on the
Tung Chung Community Services Complex in Wong Nai Uk village. Local community groups suggested relocating
the Tung Chung Community Services Complex to the sports centre proposed at
the west of Yat Tung Estate before demolishing the current building. They
also suggested relocating the non-government organisations in phases, so as
not to affect the provision of services and job opportunities offered by the
organisations. |
· Sufficient
government and community facilities for various groups such as the youth,
elderly, ethnic minorities, etc. have been proposed in accordance with the
HKPSG, and with reference to the advices from relevant departments and the
comments from the publics received during the 3 stage of the public
engagement activities. For the facilities that require policy support such as
wet market, flea market, religious facilities, etc., specific requests have been
conveyed to relevant bureau/departments for consideration. · Adequate GFA has been provided for GIC facilities
and services within the R2 sites. · A
3ha standard sports ground, which was repeatedly requested by Tung Chung
residents, has been proposed at Tung Chung East, which can be used for
different sports activities, including rugby and football. · After
discussion with the relevant Government bureau/department, in view
of an arts venue/theatre has already been proposed in Area 1
within the Tung Chung Town Centre, the Government site originally planned for
sports centre in Tung Chung West has been changed to District Open Space, in
which some facilities such as amphitheatre could be designed subject to
future detailed design. |
|
|
Religious facilities |
||
|
· Religious
related organisations voiced their opinions on the effect of the proposed
development on Tao Yan Church of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Hong
Kong, located in Wong Nai Uk Village in Tung Chung. They opined that Tao Yan
Church should be remained at the current site to maintain its service. · Religious
related organisations expressed its hope to slightly expand the existing zone
of Prajna Dhyana Temple as I/C into two pieces of government lands. They also
expressed the urgent need to have a Catholic church in Tung Chung to cater
for the local Catholic community, adding that continuous negotiation had been
done with the Government. · One
private sector proposed that a joint venture project with Dzongsar Temple
could be considered to establish a structure in Hong Kong to promote Tibetan
Buddhism and other related arts and medicine. It also expressed interest to
develop land at Nim Yuen, Lam Che and She Lau Po for “Institution or
Communities” purposes, including religious use. |
· The
religious organisations have been advised to consult the relevant bureau and
obtain policy support for their proposal separately. Separate site search for
a re-provisioning site will be carried out by the relevant Government
department if policy support is received. |
|
|
Education facilities |
||
|
· Educational
related organisations raise grave concerns on the provision of primary and
secondary schools in both TCE and TCW and requested a critical review taking
into account the latest school plans allocation in Tung Chung. · There
were requests for specific tertiary education facilities, including a
university to provide training for local people. In this regard, suggestion
to have an aviation-training centre in Tung Chung was received. · The
Vocational Training Council proposed having a centre on vocation education
and training, such as a Youth College, under Vocational Training Council in
Tung Chung. The organisation proposed grouping several lots in Tung Chung
East, with an approximate area of 19000m2, and reserving it for
the Youth College at the east part of the Tung Chung Extension. · Mixed
opinions were noted on development of international schools. Educational
related organisations specifically objected to the provision of an
international school in Tung Chung; however, the stakeholders supported the
idea. |
· For
the schools, as confirmed with the Education Bureau, the provision of primary
schools and secondary schools has been revised to six numbers and two numbers
respectively, while post-secondary education facilities and other school uses
are retained in TCE. The sites released from the reduction of 4 school sites
will either be used for residential purposes or other GIC uses serving the
community. |
|
|
Proposed marina in Tung Chung East |
||
|
· The
public generally supported the idea that the marina can enhance the vibrancy
of the area. Stakeholders opined that the capacity of proposed marina should
be limited to 300 vessels. · Stakeholders
suggested integrating the marina into the pedestrian walkway networks so that
the promenade and scenic view of the water area and the Airport could be best
utilised. They also suggested that the marina should be opened for public use
instead of being a “members only” facility. · A
private sector opposed to the development of a marina and regarded it as an
exclusive club activity, but fully supported a sheltered water area provided
by the Government for local vessels in the development proposals. · NGO/ local community groups suggested that the need of the proposed marina should be carefully evaluated, especially regarding its impact on Chinese White Dolphins arising from an increase in marine traffic in Tung Chung and its surrounding waters. |
· The
exact operation mode of the marina is being examined in detail with the
relevant bureau and departments. Marine traffic impact arising from the
implementation of the proposed marina has been assessed. · The proposed marina is intended to be opened for public access and integrated into the pedestrian walkway networks with the scenic view of the water area. |
|
|
Transport and Infrastructures |
General |
|
|
· In
general, the public opined that the transport and infrastructure network and
connectivity in Tung Chung could be further improved. Adequate provision of
transport facilities would be needed in the future development of the new
town, as suggested by local community groups. · NGO/
local community groups urged the Government to consider the existing capacity
of local bus services. · Opinion
was also noted on the burden to both the road networks and MTR services in
Tung Chung from the proposed increase in the future population of the new
town. · There
were requests for improvements on the transportation by increasing the
frequency and types of transport to improve the connectivity. · Environmentally
friendly transport systems such as electric buses, electric cars and bicycle
sharing system in Tung Chung were also suggested. · There
was also opinion that the connectivity between rural villages and other parts
of the new town could be improved. NGO/ local community groups suggested
linking Tai Ho and Three Villages with the proposed developments in Tung
Chung. They also supported revitalising Ma Wan Chung by improving its road
and car park provision, etc. · Local
community groups opined that the connectivity into Three Villages should be
improved with better utilisation of the Tai Ho Interchange. |
· Assessments
have been conducted which confirmed that the capacity of the road and railway
is sufficient to cater for the additional population from Tung Chung new town
extension and also from other nearby developments in Lantau. · A
connection between Tung Chung East and Ma Wan Chung and the provision of car
park near Ma Wan Chung were review and reflected in the RODP. · Access
to the villages would be provided as far as possible. · The
request for increasing the frequency and types of transport, and
environmentally friendly transport systems, etc. have been conveyed to the
relevant bureau and departments for consideration and further study. Space
provision for charging facilities of electric buses within new public transport interchange has been
allowed. · The
provision of connection from future Tai Ho Interchange to Tai Ho is considered. · Three
Villages are outside the Tung Chung new town extension,
and the request for improving the connectivity into Three Villages has been
conveyed to relevant bureau and departments for further consideration. |
|
|
Railway transport |
||
|
· The
public urged for an evaluation on the capacity of the MTR Tung Chung line and
strengthening of the current system for handling the increasing demand from
Tung Chung residents and visitors. The public supported the two proposed MTR
stations in Tung Chung East and West. In particular, stakeholder supported
the proposed Tung Chung East MTR Station. Opinion varied on the development
priority, detailed design and location of the proposed MTR stations. In this
regard, NGO/ local community groups expressed their disagreement on the
location of the proposed Tung Chung West MTR Station. · Extension
of the current MTR service was also noted. Local community groups suggested
that the existing Tung Chung Line could be extended northward to a new Siu Ho
Wan Station. · Local
community groups hoped the Government could explore viable options to link
the Airport Express with Tung Chung and the Airport. · MTR
Corporation suggested that a public transport interchange (PTI) should be
planned as close as possible to the proposed MTR TCE station and within the
Metro Core area, in order to encourage the use of railway and facilitate a
seamless connection between railway and other modes of transport. |
· Technical
assessments have been conducted which confirmed that the capacity of the
railway network even at the critical section is still sufficient to cater for
the additional population from Tung Chung New Town Extension and also from
other nearby developments on Lantau. · The
location of Tung Chung West railway station was proposed with consideration
of various constraints such as alignment, available land, engineering
feasibility, etc. Indeed, a TOD principle has been adopted around TCW
station, which is surrounded by high-density subsidized housing development
of the existing Yat Tung Estate and planned Area 39. We have also proposed commercial uses
adjacent to the station to serve as a focal point. Development intensity also
gradually descends further away from the station. · The
feasibility of extending existing Tung Chung Line to Siu Ho Wan Station will
be studied under separate feasibility study for Siu Ho Wan development. · Suggestion
of linking the Airport Express Link with Tung Chung and the Airport is now
being reviewed under separate study for topside development at HKBCF
island. |
|
|
Road network |
||
|
· The
proposed Tai Ho Interchange and Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) to
improve the connectivity of Tung Chung was supported by stakeholders. They
suggested extending the road networks, including linking Cheung Tung Road to
Tai Ho Interchange and the existing pedestrian and cycling underpass from Tai
Ho access point to the shoreline of Tung Chung East for leisure activities. · Local
community groups also opined that existing road networks could be further
extended to Tai Ho Bay. · A
private sector opined that the access road to Shek Lau Po should be extended
to Chung Yat Street to facilitate traffic flow. There was also suggestions on
the design of the road network, such as widening Cheung Tung Road into four
lanes, linking and widening the coverage of local pedestrian path, building
cycling paths and a promenade to link up different parts of Tung Chung. · A
private sector also proposed a designated route linking different parts of
Tung Chung West for visitors. · NGO/
local community groups called for attention on the construction of the
proposed road linking Shek Mun Kap to Mok Ka Village aligned through an
Ecological Important Stream recognised by the AFCD. They also mentioned that
no road access to sensitive areas such as natural coastlines, riverbanks, fung
shui woods and ecologically valuable sites should be provided to avoid
pollution and illegal dumping in those areas. They also opined that traffic
restrictions should be imposed in Tung Chung West to prevent adverse
environmental impact to Tung Chung Valley. · Regarding
road safety, local community groups suggested the adoption of the London mode
to develop a road layout with important elements such as speed management,
street design techniques and enhancement measures of safety to deal with
possible at-grade crossings. · NGO/
local community groups suggested minimising the lands reserved for roads for
greenery walkways and supported revitalising Ma Wan Chung by improving its
road and car park provision. |
· A
proper road connection network, cycling paths, a greenery walkway and
waterfront promenade linking various parts of Tung Chung including villages
in Tung Chung West have been proposed in the RODP. These measures
will serve as a long-term improvement for the connectivity within the entire
Tung Chung. Improvement of road connection and provision of cark parks near
Ma Wan Chung are also proposed. Provision of connection from future Tai Ho
Interchange to Cheung Tung Road is considered. · The
proposed road alignment has taken into account of the findings of an ecological
survey, and an EIA has been carried out to ensure the impact of road
construction to Tung Chung Stream will be acceptable. A detailed
design of the roads with consideration on road safety, etc. will be carried
out in the Design and Construction phase of the project. · The
requests for improving the existing roads, such as Chung Yat Street, Cheung
Tung Road, local pedestrian path, etc. have been conveyed to relevant
departments for consideration. |
|
|
Cycling |
||
|
· There
were requests on improving the cycle track network in Tung Chung to cater for
the needs of local residents, tourists and professional/sports cyclists in
the area. · For
the existing cycle track network, local community groups opined that it
should be linked together so that the use of bicycles could further be
promoted. · There
were suggestions on measures to avoid conflict of usage between drivers and
cyclists on roads in the area, so that experienced cyclists would be able to
share the road with other users in the future. It is proposed connecting
cycling tracks in both Tung Chung West and Tung Chung East and adopting
extensive traffic calming design features for cyclists. · Opinion was also sought from cycling clubs in Tung Chung. It is stressed that there should not be any restrictions for cyclists to use Cheung Tung Road and that strict speed limits should be set for all users for safety reason. Ancillary facilities for cycling, such as more cycle parking spaces and rental kiosks, were also suggested. |
· Suggestions
on existing facilities, such as linking the existing cycle track,
unrestricted use of Cheung Tung Road for cyclist, etc. are limited by many
existing constraints. Nevertheless, such suggestions have been conveyed to
the relevant department for consideration. Any future cycle track network will need to be designed in compliance with relevant standards. The appropriate width and safety features will be further studied and enhanced. With regards to the proposed cycling lane (i.e., a cycle lane next to vehicular road with no physical barrier as currently used in some countries), discussions with the relevant department indicated that such idea is not yet applicable in Hong Kong at this stage due to different legislations, safety standards, and driving culture, etc. |
|
|
Economic Development |
General |
|
|
· The
proposed economic development under the draft RODP taking into account the
nearby developments in Lantau was generally appreciated. · There
were comments that local job opportunities should be provided to match the
skills of labour available in Tung Chung, with suggestions of industries,
such as those related to technology and the environment, could be further
developed in the new town. · It
was also pointed out that further economic development opportunities could be
brought by nearby development projects in Lantau, such as the North
Commercial District (NCD) of the Hong Kong international Airport, which
should be considered in the overall planning of economic development in Tung
Chung. |
· Relevant
parties and organisations of nearby developments in Lantau have been
consulted, and their valuable comments have been taken into account in
formulating the economic development for the RODP of Tung Chung. Sufficient
and diverse job opportunities with diverse skills have been proposed to
ensure Tung Chung and nearby projects are complementing but not competing
with each other. |
|
|
Tourism |
||
|
· There
was opinion on the further development of local tourism in Tung Chung. In this regard, the NGO/ local community
groups suggested that more efforts should be done to attract visitors to the
area, especially by developing local tourism and preserving sites with
historical and cultural values. They also urged for avoidance of possible
conflicts between locals and tourists due to tourism development. Improvement
on the natural shoreline in Tung Chung, such as better linkage to the
waterfront promenade, was another suggestion to attract more visitors to the
area. · Opinion
on promoting eco-tourism by preservation of the natural scenery in Tung Chung
was also suggested. The stakeholders suggested developing eco-tourism in the
Tai Ho valley, which they suggested could be converted as an “Ecology and
Heritage Park”. |
· The
protection of sites with historic and cultural values is one of the key
development principles of our RODP. Local tourism is also encouraged in the
RODP, e.g. the revitalisation of the Ma Wan Chung village, and the connected
waterfront promenade. The proposed River Park would also aim to promote
eco-education. |
|
|
Local economy |
||
|
· Development
of local economy was urged for from the public and organisations which
supported an increased commercial space and provision of waterfront retail
and street shops. · The
proposal of street shops and local retailing services providing a variety of
affordable goods, rather than a large shopping mall with chained stores, was
generally supported. There were also suggestions of additional local retail
opportunities including public wet markets, flea markets, cooked food centres,
etc. An underground shopping mall was also suggested by a local community
group to better utilise the available space and widen the retail
opportunities. · It
was suggested that products incorporating the characteristics of the area
could be sold at the aforementioned local retail opportunities while job
opportunities could be offered to Tung Chung residents, which could help to
diversify future job opportunities. · More
diversified development in the local economy in addition to tourism
development was also suggested. In this regard, the NGO/ local community
groups proposed the development on local agriculture and flea markets to
establish a diversified economy in Tung Chung. · In
terms of agriculture, the NGO/ local community groups opined that farmland in
Tung Chung West should not be used as low-density village type development,
but should be purchased by the Government and leased to those who were
eligible to apply for the Agricultural Land Rehabilitation Scheme. · Local
community groups pointed out that more land for airplane and vessel
maintenance, scientific research centres or other high value-added positions
in Tung Chung could be included in the future development of the new town and
thus help develop Hong Kong into a “knowledge economy”. It was also suggested
that the waterfront area could be used for development of local economy. · MTR
Corporation mentioned that retail elements in the proposed footbridges
between the Metro Core and proposed TCE MTR station could be incorporated to
create more commercial floor space and employment opportunities. Topside
development was also suggested to maximise development potential and land
resources offered by the proposed TCE MTR station. |
· The
Study Team is fully aware of the need to match the jobs with the skills of
the residents. The study team has been coordinating with project proponents
of nearby developments for creating job opportunities of diverse nature. In
the RODP, the positioning of Tung Chung has been steered towards a major
office node of the region after taken into account the surrounding
developments such as NCD and HKBCF, which are going towards retail/hotel
uses. It is estimated with the variety of commercial uses (including office,
retail, hotel, etc) in the future, it will definitely lead to a more diverse
job nature for the benefit of existing and future residents. Moreover, our
reserved site for post-secondary education institutions will provide
opportunity for technical training courses in training up the suitable
skillset for residents with the different type of jobs in Tung Chung and the
surroundings. · We
are fully aware of the community’s demand for both shopping malls and “local
shops” or “street shops”, with a diversity of retail spaces not only
convenient to the locals, but also providing local job opportunities and
creating street vibrancy. Regarding the request for public wet markets, it is
understood that these will be provided by HD in the upcoming PRH developments
in Area 39 and Area 56. As for flea markets, the comments are noted and
conveyed to the relevant Government departments. Nevertheless, in the
proposed DO in our RODP, there are potential for flea markets on application
to LCSD in future. |
|
|
Development Scale |
General |
|
|
· The
public generally supported further development of Tung Chung New Town and
urged for its earlier implementation. The public opined that an enhanced
development plan for Tung Chung Town Centre, Yat Tung Estate and Ma Wan Chung
Village should be formulated. · Local
community groups pointed out that future development should focus on the
entire Tung Chung rather than the extension areas only. There was support for
advocating a stepped height profile and stringent building height
restrictions near the waterfront in Tung Chung. Moreover, they also showed
strong support for the strategic planning for Tung Chung reclamation area and
suggested the benefits brought by surrounding transportation infrastructures
should be better utilised. · Stakeholders
in general supported the RODP for Tung Chung East, which utilised the concept
of transport-oriented development. |
· The
support on the draft RODP is noted. The Study has already taken the existing
Tung Chung New Town into account. |
|
|
Development density |
||
|
· There
were no major comments on the proposed development scale for Tung Chung East.
In terms of development in Tung Chung West, the proposed development was
generally supported. · More
specific comments were received which opined that the residential zone, with
a low to medium development density, could be designated to preserve the
natural coastal area and the view of Hau Wong Temple in Tung Chung West. · Moreover,
stakeholders opined that the plot ratio for Tung Chung West should be
increased to balance environmental protection and the local housing needs and
they suggested developing Tung Chung West with a dual emphasis on the natural
scenery of the Tung Chung Stream and local characteristics. Five areas could
be designated for different purposes, focusing on cultural heritage, local
ecology, agriculture, fishery and a central market. · During
the PE3 Public Forum, the Expert Panel suggested the concept of harmonious community
in development, and pointed out that the importance of local economy with
regard to the planning, provision of community services and desired living
environment. |
· The
RODP has been reviewed. It is considered that the development intensity of
TCE is appropriate taken into account various considerations including urban
design, airport height restriction, environmental, air ventilation, traffic,
sewage, drainage, etc. · The
TCW RODP has been reviewed. Two additional plots have now been used for
residential use (the “GB” site near Ngau Au and the additional primary school
adjacent to TCV-6 site) and the development intensity of the R4 site has been
slightly increased from Plot Ratio (PR) 0.75 to PR1. |
|
|
Population |
||
|
· There
were diverse views on the population. Some parties were worried about the
increase in population; for example, NGO/ local community groups suggested
that the proposed population in TCE should be reduced. · However
there were also suggestions that the plot ratio in Tung Chung West should be
increased, as mentioned by the Liberal party who opined that the estimated
population for Tung Chung West had been very low compared with that of Tung
Chung East. · There
were also concerns that population increase would be inadequate to fill the
future jobs provided in the area including the Airport. Opinion was noted in
urging for a review on the proposed population growth in Tung Chung. |
· The
proposed additional population in the RODP aims to strike a balance between
various aspects including housing demand, environmental impact, impact on
local community, capacity of infrastructure, etc. |
|
|
Housing Development |
General |
|
|
· A
balanced provision of public and private housing was generally appreciated
and there were different proposals on the types, distribution and locations
of housing development. · A
private sector opined that public and private housings should not be divided
to obtain a balanced development on community facilities and a social impact assessment
should be conducted and it suggested increasing the amount of private housing
in Tung Chung West. · In
regard to the natural environment in Tung Chung West, comments were received
from the NGO/ local community groups, cautioning against excessive
residential development in the area, which might bring adverse environmental
and ecological impacts to Tung Chung Stream and Tung Chung Bay. · Wong
Nai Uk village expressed their concern about the possible walled effect at
Wong Nai Uk village as it would be surrounded by North Lantau Hospital, Yat
Tung Estate and the proposed Residential 2 (R2) development, and suggested
refining the design of R2 development to avoid the effect. · Local
community groups supported revitalising Ma Wan Chung by conducting house
enhancement works and advocated the concept of Green City in the development
of Tung Chung with the provision of green spaces and green roofs in addition
to a balanced housing development integrating with the surrounding
environment. |
· The
proposed mix of public and private housings has made reference to the
recommendation given in the Long Term Housing Strategy. · A large part of the “R2” site adjoining the
Town Park is already included as “R(A)” zone for high-density residential
development in the existing Outline Zoning Plan. When compared to the
existing R(A) zone, the development scale for the R2 site on the RODP has
been reduced from PR5 to PR4, and the Building Height Restriction (BHR) of
the “R2” site has been maintained as 75mPD which will not be higher than the
peak of the Town Park. Air Ventilation Assessment, Landscape and Visual
Impact Assessment and proper urban design have been conducted to ensure the
impacts are acceptable. |
|
|
Public housing |
||
|
· In
the joint submission, NGO/ local community groups expressed their concerns
about the residential development near Tung Chung Valley as it is
incompatible with the physical and ecological setting of the area and
violates the principles of the Convention on Biological Diversity. · Religious
related organisations suggested relocating the nearby residential buildings
to the other side of Tung Chung Stream in order to maintain an adequate
distance with the Temple and alleviate the potential impacts on lighting and
air ventilation. The opinion was echoed in the submission by local community
groups, who proposed relocating the public housing blocks to the lands near
Tung Chung West MTR Station. · Stakeholders
considered the infrastructure and connectivity of Area 56 as inadequate for
the proposed public housing development, and opined that the development
might cause heavy road traffic and increase of traveling costs to residents. |
· The
proposed residential use in Tung Chung Valley was based on urban planning
consideration as well as the findings of ecological survey. Statutory EIA
under the EIAO has been carried out to confirm that the physical and
ecological setting of the area are acceptable and the principles of the
Convention on Biological Diversity not violated. · The
RS site near Prajna Dhyana Temple in Shek Mun Kap is considered suitable for
development and will be remained on the RODP. Possible noise nuisance from
temple activities will be mitigated by appropriate building
design/orientation in the detailed design stage. · The
type of subsidised housing (i.e. PRH or HOS) will be further examined and
determined at a later stage in consultation with Housing Department. · The
concern on infrastructure and connectivity of Area 56 within existing town
centre has been conveyed to the relevant department for consideration. |
|
|
Other Comments |
· NGO/
local community groups expressed its opinion on the arrangement of the Public
Forum held on 11 October 2014, and suggested holding more Public Forums at
different venues. The group also recommended that more exercises should be
done in Stage 3 Public Engagement, with more information such as the
demographic data of Tung Chung and technical data related to the environment
of the new town provided. · There
are comments about the high living cost, transport fares, etc. in Tung Chung.
Local community groups opted for cancelling the Tsing Ma Control Area and the
fees for North Lantau Highway to lower the cost of travelling and attract
visitors to the area. · There
are requests from villages outside the proposed new town expansion area (e.g.
villages of San Tau and Tai Ho) that TCNT extension should include proposals
to address their needs such as providing road connectivity and village
sewerage. |
· During
the two and a half month period of PE3, extensive engagement activities
involving series of meetings with a wide range of stakeholders with different
background were carried out, during which a large amount of valuable comments
and suggestions were received. These comments and suggestions provide an
extremely useful basis for the refinement of the development plans and the
associated technical assessments, which will take considerable time. To
facilitate an earlier implementation of the proposed development in response
to the demand from the public, an analysis of PE3 views, finalization of development
plans and technical assessments have been commenced immediately after the end
of PE3. The relevant assessment data will be made available at an appropriate
stage when the assessments are substantially completed. · Other
comments such as living cost, transport fares, etc. have been conveyed to
other departments for consideration. · The
requests from villages outside Tung Chung New Town Extension area have been
conveyed to relevant departments for consideration as well. |
2.3.2.8 To summarise, a total of 3 stages of public consultation exercises had been conducted and during which liaison meetings had been conducted to collate the views from various stakeholders, local community and NGOs etc. Comments/ suggestions received cover a wide range of issues including but not limited to environmental, planning, facilities, economic etc. All these concerns have been properly addressed during the formulation of RODP and are briefly explained in this EIA Report. The key environmental aspects of concern are summarised below.
|
Key
Environmental Aspects of Concern |
Approaches
to Address Comments |
|
1.
Impact on Chinese White Dolphins due to
reclamation works at TCE shall be minimised |
1.
Reclamation site at TCE has been
optimized to minimise impacts on Chinese White Dolphins and water quality
during construction of reclamation shall be duly minimized by adopting
non-dredged reclamation methodology |
|
2.
Reclamation at TCW not preferred |
2.
Reclamation at TCW has been avoided to
allay public concern |
|
3.
Tung Chung Stream and other ecologically
sensitive areas in TCW shall be conserved |
3.
CA, CPA, GB zoning has been assigned to
provide buffer zone for all ecological sensitive areas |
|
4.
Declared monuments, graded historic
buildings with high cultural value in TCW shall be avoided |
4.
Development has avoided nearby declared
monuments, graded historic buildings |
|
5.
The existing channelized section of Tung
Chung Stream in TCW shall be revitalised |
5.
The channelized section of Tung Chung
Stream has been revitalised to enhance its ecological function |
|
6.
Concern on air quality in Tung Chung |
6.
Setback distance between NLH and TM-CLKL
and planned residential development has been provided and space provision for
railway system has been considered so that more future residents can enjoy
the environmental friendly transport system |
2.4
Summary of
Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP)
2.4.1
Overview
Key Design Principles
2.4.1.1
Urban
design of the Project is driven by a series of design concepts that were
developed during the course of the study and embody the opportunities for
increasing pedestrian connectivity between TCE, TCW and the existing Tung Chung
New Town, capitalizing on the location of the proposed new railway stations and
integration with the surrounding context. The key design concepts are listed
below.
1) Transport Oriented Development
2.4.1.2
In
order to capitalize on the development opportunities presented by major new
public transport links to the territory but also within Tung Chung itself, the
concept of Transport-Oriented Development is utilized to create highly
concentrated hubs of activity and residential areas in close proximity to the
proposed railway stations.
2.4.1.3
The
increased development intensity around the proposed railway stations is seen as
an opportunity to create a new, highly visible centrality that is emblematic of
the New Town and its aspirations to become the home of a new generation of
residents.
2.4.1.4
As
such, residential land uses such as Residential Special (PR 5 – 6.5),
Residential 1 (PR 6.5) and Comprehensive Development Area (domestic PR 6 + non-domestic PR 2.76/2.78) are assigned near the proposed
railway station at TCE and the proposed railway station at TCW is assigned near
Yat Tung Estate in which most of the local residents can be benefited. (See Section 2.4.1 Part A for details). However,
the design, construction and
operation of these railway stations will be carried out by the railway
operator and will not be included under this Study.
2) Connectivity
2.4.1.5
Convenient
physical mobility between residential areas and key activity nodes is crucial
to creating an open and accessible spatial setting within which can inspire a
feeling of belonging to the place for new residents.
2.4.1.6
Planning
for enhanced connectivity is one of the major underlying themes of the layout
in the Project, with particular attention paid to the linkages between the Tung
Chung Town Centre and TCW via the Town Park as well as the connections between
TCE and Tung Chung Town Centre. The goal is to create a mobility system that
considers the entire Tung Chung as a unified town composed of distinct
districts.
2.4.1.7
As
such, approximately 49.11ha of open space area as well as 36.96ha of road
networks including primary, district and local distributors are allowed in the
RODP. Details of the design can be referred to Section 2.4.1 Part J and Section
2.4.1 Part N respectively.
3) Integration
2.4.1.8
As
an extension to the existing Tung Chung, new development seeks to maximize
integration with the existing built form and to balance the need for new
residential development with the natural features of the site. In order to
create a unified urban form that respects the existing layout and minimizes
adverse impacts on the natural environment integration strategies are employed
throughout the Projects.
2.4.1.9
As
such, approximately 10.42ha of Conservation Area (CA) and 4.94ha of Coastal
Protection Area (CPA) are reserved for protection of Tung Chung Stream and the
coastline of Tung Chung Bay which have high ecological and landscape resources
in the RODP. Details of the design can be referred to Section 2.4.1 Part H and Section 2.4.1 Part I respectively.
4) Stepped Height Profile
2.4.1.10 In order to achieve an integration
between natural topography and existing built form, stepped height profile has
been adopted in this Project. The height and density of the buildings at TCE
are designed to descend towards the waterfront while the rural residential area
at TCW near the estuary of Tung Chung Stream will adopt lower PRs in order to
preserve the rural environment.
Overall
Land Use Budgets in RODP
2.4.1.11 The overall land use budget for new
developments in the PDAs at TCE and TCW (including the Road P1(Tung Chung – Tai
Ho Section)) are as follows:
Table
2.7 Land use budget for Tung Chung New Town Extension
|
Major Land
Uses |
Area in ha |
|||
|
TCE at PDA |
TCW at PDA |
Road P1 |
Total Area |
|
|
Commercial |
7.64 |
1.12 |
- |
8.76 |
|
CDA (metro core) |
7.65 |
- |
- |
7.65 |
|
Residential |
43.95 |
27.95 |
- |
71.90 |
|
· Special Residential |
23.99 |
5.01 |
- |
29 |
|
· Residential
Zone 1 |
2.72 |
- |
- |
2.72 |
|
· Residential
Zone 2 |
1.02 |
1.82 |
- |
2.84 |
|
· Residential Zone 3 |
16.22 |
8.03 |
- |
24.25 |
|
· Residential Zone 4 |
- |
13.09 |
- |
13.09 |
|
Village Type Development |
- |
14.00 |
- |
14 |
|
Government |
7.44 |
4.72 |
- |
12.16 |
|
Institution or Community |
- |
0.30 |
- |
0.3 |
|
Education |
9.11 |
- |
- |
9.11 |
|
Other Specified Uses |
1.92 |
5.11 |
- |
7.03 |
|
Open Space |
21.48 |
24.70 |
2.93 |
49.11 |
|
· Regional Open Space |
10.74 |
1.76 |
2.93 |
15.43 |
|
· District Open Space |
10. 74 |
22.94 |
- |
22.94 |
|
· Local Open Space |
Within
Residential Zones |
|||
|
Agriculture |
- |
4.97 |
- |
4.97 |
|
Green Belt |
- |
13.24 |
- |
13.24 |
|
Conservation Area |
- |
10.42 |
- |
10.42 |
|
Coastal Protection Area |
- |
4.94 |
- |
4.94 |
|
Road |
23.19 |
7.88 |
5.89 |
36.96 |
|
TOTAL |
122.38 |
119.35 |
8.82 |
250.55 |
Remarks: Zoning boundaries in the RODP are to illustrate the broad
development areas within the PDA, or based on the ecological survey conducted
for this EIA only, and may be subject to detailed survey and layout in future.
2.4.1.12 The proposed land use zonings of the
RODP for PDAs at TCE and TCW are shown in Figure
2.2 and Figure
2.3 respectively
and their relevant site IDs are illustrated in Figure
2.4 and Figure
2.5. Detailed
layout plan with building layout of the RODP for PDAs at TCE and TCW are shown
in Appendix
2.1.
A.
Comprehensive Development Area (CDA) (Figure 2.6a and Figure 2.6b)
TCE
2.4.1.13 This zone is intended for
comprehensive residential, retail and office development as a “Metro Core Area”
in the RODP connecting to the proposed TCE railway station. The Metro Core Area
is intended to function as the key centre for the entire TCE development.
2.4.1.14 Within the RODP, “A1-1” and
“A1-2”, with areas of 3.90ha and 3.75ha respectively are proposed for the
zoning. The rationale for this zoning is 1) to provide a means for achieving
coordinated development along NLH as buffer/screen where subject to environmental constraints; 2) to ensure
adequate and timely provision of G/IC facilities, public transport facilities,
transport connections and open space serving the entire TCE area and 3) to
ensure the relevant authority to have an appropriate control on the overall
scale and design of development at this location with high centrality and
gateway of the entire TCE reclamation area. The layout should be
designed carefully by future developers through Master Layout Plan (MLP).
2.4.1.15 Given the connectivity with the proposed TCE railway
station and its emblematic centrality, higher development intensity will be
appropriate for this Metro Core Area. “A1-1” and “A1-2” are subject to a total PR of about 8.8, including
PR6.0 for domestic use and PR2.76/2.78 for non-domestic use. The high
development intensity would allow the Metro Core Area to be distinguished from
a distance from the surrounding buildings and its role as the development core
of the RODP will be emphasized. A maximum building height (BH) restriction is ranging from 105mPD to 195mPD as stipulated
on the Plan.
B.
Residential Developments (Figure 2.6a and Figure 2.6b)
1) Special Residential (RS)
2.4.1.16 This zone is intended for high-density
residential development for subsidized housing. Thirteen sites are proposed for
Residential Special (RS) zoning for high density subsidised residential
development in the RODP.
TCE
2.4.1.17 Within the PDA at TCE, 11 sites are
proposed for “RS” zoning. They include “A2-1”, “A2-4”, “B0-4”, “B1-2”, “C1-1”,
“C2-1”, “C2-2”, “D2-3”, “D2-4”, “E1-1” and “E1-5”. These sites are mostly
within the 500m catchment around the proposed TCE railway station to allow
convenient access to public transport. Development within these sites is
subject to a maximum domestic PR ranging from 5 to 6.5 (with
non-domestic PR ranging from 0.4 or 0.5) and a maximum building height restriction ranging from 95mPD to
140mPD as stipulated on the Plan. Stepped building height considerations have
been taken into account the surrounding planned developments.
TCW
2.4.1.18 Within the PDA at TCW, 2 sites are
proposed for “RS” zoning.
They include “TCV-6” & “TCV-7” along Tung Chung Road. These 2 sites
are located south of the planned Public Rental Housing in Area 39, and are
along the western side of the Tung Chung Road. Development within TCV-6 is subject to a maximum
domestic PR of 6 (with non-domestic PR of 0.4) and a maximum building height
restriction of 130mPD as stipulated on the plan, which results in a stepped BH
profile with the planned Area 39 Public Rental Housing to its immediate north. “TCV-7” is located at the
southern end of the Tung Chung Valley. Development within this site is subject
to a maximum PR of 5 (with non-domestic PR of 0.4) and a maximum building height of
140mPD as stipulated on the Plan.
2) Residential Zone 1 (R1)
2.4.1.19 This zone is intended for high-density
residential developments.
TCE
2.4.1.20 Two
sites are proposed for “R1” zoning (“A2-2”
& “A2-3”) intended for high-density private residential development in the PDA.
2.4.1.21 Both
“R1” sites are located to the immediate north of the Metro Core Area CDA. These
two “R1” sites are subject to a maximum domestic PR of 6.5. The maximum BH of 105mPD.
3) Residential Zone 2 (R2)
2.4.1.22 This zone is intended for medium-density
residential developments.
TCE
2.4.1.23 Two sites, i.e. “E1-2” and “E1-3” are proposed for “R2” zoning intended for medium density residential development in the RODP.
2.4.1.24 Both
“R2” sites are subject to a maximum domestic PR of 5 and a maximum BH restriction of 90mPD.
Non-domestic PR of about 0.4 is proposed for local commercial uses. It is
recommended that both “R2” sites are to reserve the area fronting the DO and
the Central Green to be developed into an area for ‘Shop & Services’ and
‘Eating Place’ uses in buildings not exceeding two storeys above ground as
retail frontage within these “R2” sites. The intention is to encourage “street-life” and retail shops
serving the locals and promotion of lively streetscapes and activities
along the key pedestrian corridors.
TCW
2.4.1.25 One site, i.e. “TCW-2”
located at the south-eastern edge of the future Town Park is proposed for “R2”
zoning for medium density residential development in the RODP.
2.4.1.26 “TCW-2”
lies along Chung Yan Road, with a lower development intensity to adhere to the
setting against the backdrop of the Town Park which the tallest point is about
75mPD. Therefore, development within this site is subject to a maximum domestic
PR of 4 (with non-domestic PR of 0.1), with a maximum BH of 75mPD as stipulated on
the Plan.
4) Residential Zone 3 (R3)
2.4.1.27 This zone is intended for low-density
residential developments.
TCE
2.4.1.28 Within the RODP, 11
sites are proposed for “R3” zoning. They include “D1-1”, “D1-2”, “D2-1”, “D2-2”, “E1-4”, “E3-1”, “E3-2”,
“F1-1”, “F1-2”, “F2-1” & “F2-2”. All
these sites are located along or near the waterfront. For sites in the
north-western part of the RODP, i.e. “D1-1”, “D1-2” &
“D2-1”, development within these sites
are subject to a maximum domestic PR of 3.5 and a maximum BH of 70mPD. For sites “D2-2”
& “E3-1”,
development are subject to a maximum domestic PR of 3.5 and a non-domestic PR
of 0.3 and 0.4 and a
maximum BH of 70mPD.
2.4.1.29 For sites in the north-eastern part of the RODP, i.e. “E1-4”, “E3-2”, “F1-1”, “F1-2”,
“F2-1” & “F2-2”, development within
these sites is subject to a maximum domestic PR of 2.5 to 3, and a maximum
non-domestic PR of 0.3 and 0.4, if any, and a maximum BH ranging from 45mPD to 70mPD.
The maximum BH descends towards the northeast.
TCW
2.4.1.30 Within
the RODP, 4 sites are proposed for “R3” zoning. They
include “TCW-1”,
“TCW-3”, “TCV-5a” & “TCV-5b”.
2.4.1.31 “TCW-3” is located between the “TCW-2” R2
Site and Ma Wan Chung. Given its elongated site layout and proximity to the
low-rise Ma Wan Chung village, it is subject to a domestic PR of 2 and maximum BH
of 55mPD as stipulated on the Plan. “TCW-1”is
located to the west of the existing Yat Tung Estate. Development within this
site is subject to a maximum domestic PR of 3.5 and a maximum BH
of 70mPD as stipulated on the Plan.
2.4.1.32 “TCV-5a” &
“TCV-5b” are located in the inner part of
the Tung Chung Valley, to the north of the Shek Mun Kap Road and in between the
Tung Chung Steam. The 2 sites are separated by a proposed 7.3m road connecting
Shek Mun Kap Road to Mok Ka Village. Development within these two sites are
subject to a maximum domestic PR of 1.5 and a maximum BH
of 45mPD as stipulated on the Plan. The development intensity is to adhere to
the rural context and the low-rise village environment of the adjoining Shek
Lau Po, Shek Mun Kap and Mok Ka villages.
5) Residential Zone 4 (R4)
2.4.1.33 This zone is intended for low-density rural
residential developments.
TCW
2.4.1.34 Within the RODP, 5 sites within Tung Chung Valley are
proposed for the “R4” zoning. They include “TCV-1”, “TCV-2”, “TCV-3”, “TCV-4” and “TCV-8”. All 5 sites
are located in the central part of Tung Chung Valley and along the
environmentally-sensitive Tung Chung Steam. In order to achieve an integration with the existing
naturalistic and rural settlement character of Tung Chung Valley and avoid disturbance to the adjacent woodland
habitats and natural stream courses during operational phase, a lower development
intensity is proposed.
2.4.1.35 The “R4” Sites are subject to a maximum domestic PR of
1 and a maximum BH ranging from 20mPD to 55mPD as stipulated on the Plan. This
BH range is to ensure a stepped BH profile from Tung Chung Estuary to the inner
part of Tung Chung Valley, where the topography is relatively higher, in
particular for “TCV-4” that will be developed on a formed slope south of Nim
Yuen village.
Planned Flat Provision and Population
2.4.1.36 As discussed in Chapter
1, in order to cope
with the territorial need on housing, the residential development potential of
the Project are explored and the land resources should be optimized, while
maintaining a suitable environment and opportunities for commercial development
that is compatible with the regional developments and recreational facilities.
2.4.1.37 Taking into account the local context,
public views collected during the Public Engagement activities as well as
territorial aspirations, the land use proposal of the RODP is to provide a
total of about 49,400 flats, with an additional population of around 144,400.
2.4.1.38 The following Table 2.8 shows the proposed flat provision and anticipated
population of the RODP and in comparison with the existing Tung Chung New Town.
Table
2.8 Flat provision and anticipated population
|
Existing
and Planned [1] |
||
|
|
Population |
Flat No. |
|
Existing |
78,400 |
28,800 |
|
Existing + Planned |
124,000 |
44,200 |
|
Additional
Population in RODP |
||
|
|
Population |
Flat No. |
|
TCE |
118,900 |
40,800 |
|
TCW |
25,500 |
8,600 |
|
Sub-total
|
144,400 |
49,400 |
|
Overall
Population Upon Full Development (Existing + Planned [1] +
Additional Population in RODP) |
||
|
|
Population |
Flat No. |
|
Total |
268,400 |
93,600 |
Note:
[1] Planned population
includes residential developments in Area 27, Area 39, Area 54, Area 55a, Area
55b and Area 56
Housing Mix
2.4.1.39 In response to the recommendations of
the Long Term Housing Strategy in 2014, and subsequently requested by the Housing
Department in Jan 2014, the public to private housing ratio for newly proposed
development in the Project will be at least 60:40 and the breakdown of flat numbers
allowed in the RODP are summarized in Table 2.9 below.
Table 2.9 Public: Private Housing Ratio
|
Existing
& Planned [1] |
|||
|
TCE |
TCW |
TCE + TCW |
|
|
Public |
11,100 |
16,900 |
28,000 |
|
Private |
16,200 |
0 |
16,200 |
|
Total |
27,300 |
16,900 |
44,200 |
|
% of
Public Flat |
41% |
100% |
63% |
|
% of
Private Flat |
59% |
0% |
37% |
|
Additional
Housing in RODP |
|||
|
TCE |
TCW |
TCE + TCW |
|
|
Public |
25,700 |
5,200 |
30,900 |
|
Private |
15,100 |
3,400 |
18,500 |
|
Total |
40,800 |
8,600 |
49,400 |
|
% of
Public Flat |
63% |
60% |
63% |
|
% of
Private Flat |
37% |
40% |
37% |
|
Overall
Flat Upon Full Development (Existing + Planned [1] + Additional
Housing in RODP) |
|||
|
TCE |
TCW |
TCE + TCW |
|
|
Public |
36,800 |
22,100 |
58,900 |
|
Private |
31,300 |
3,400 |
34,700 |
|
Total |
68,100 |
25,500 |
93,600 |
|
% of
Public Flat |
54% |
87% |
63% |
|
% of
Private Flat |
46% |
13% |
37% |
Note:
[1] Planned population
includes residential developments in Area 27, Area 39, Area 54, Area 55a, Area
55b and Area 56
C.
Village Type Development (Figure 2.7)
2.4.1.40 This zone is to reflect existing recognized
and other villages, and to reserve land suitable for future village expansion.
Land within this zone is reserved for development of small houses by indigenous
villagers.
TCW
2.4.1.41 Within the PDA, 8 sites are proposed for the
“V” zoning. These include Wong Nai Uk, Ma Wan Chung, Ngau Au, Nim Yuen, Lam
Che, Shek Lau Po, Mok Ka and Shek Mun Kap villages. The boundaries of the “V”
zones are intended to concentrate village type development within this
zone, within the established Village
Environs, and taken into account the existing village cluster, projected small
houses demands (outstanding and 10-year forecast), as well as other factors
such as local topography, natural characteristics and existing site conditions
etc. Area of difficult terrain, dense vegetation, burial grounds, ecological
sensitive areas and streamcourses have been avoided where possible.
2.4.1.42 Development within the “V” zones are subject
to a maximum BH of 3
storeys (8.23m). The approximate
sizes of each village zone are summarised in Table 2.10.
Table 2.10 Size of village zone
|
Village
Name |
Area in ha (Approximate) |
|
Ma Wan
Chung |
3.26 |
|
Wong Nei Uk |
0.23 |
|
Shek Lau Po |
3.37 |
|
Shek Mun
Kap |
2.75 |
|
Mok Ka |
2.06 |
|
Nim Yuen |
0.15 |
|
Lam Che |
0.41 |
|
Ngau Au |
1.77 |
|
Total |
14.0 |
D.
Commercial Uses (Figure 2.8a and Figure 2.8b)
2.4.1.43 This zone is intended for commercial uses to
serve the local community as well as the regional demand for commercial
facilities.
TCE
2.4.1.44 The total area of the “C” zone is approximately 7.64ha. A Retail and Office Belt along NLH, consists of 3 sites,
i.e. “COM-1”,
“COM-2” & “COM-3”, is intended as an
extension to the Metro Core Area. These “C” Sites, designated with a PR from 9
to 9.5 are intended to form part of the “Major Office Node” along the NLH with
retail facilities on lower floors. In order to enhance the pedestrian
connectivity of the 3 “C” sites with the Metro Core Area, pedestrian
footbridges/ connections with 24-hour public access should be provided between
the “CDA” sites and the “C” sites.
2.4.1.45 The other 2 “C” Sites, i.e. “COM-4” and “COM-5” are located at the northern tip of the RODP,
around the proposed 95-berths marina. “COM-5” is intended to be developed into a low-rise marina
clubhouse with retail and catering activities to create a vibrant waterfront
and is subject to a maximum PR of 3 and a maximum BH of 45mPD, and urban design
consideration of being along the waterfront. The design of this “C” Site should
also synergize with the proposed waterfront park to its immediate north to form
a vibrant activity node.
2.4.1.46 “COM-4” is intended to be developed into a hotel with supporting retail and
dining activities, and is subject to a maximum PR of 3 and a maximum BH of
45mPD, and urban design consideration of being along the waterfront.
TCW
2.4.1.47 Within the PDA, three sites
are proposed for the “C” zoning,
clustered around the proposed TCW railway station and to the south of the Hau
Wong Temple, i.e. “COM-1”, “COM-2”, “COM-3”.
These “C” Sites, designated with a PR of 2 to 3 is intended to serve as a central hub of retail
activities serving the future population in the RODP, as well as population in
Yat Tung Estate and future population in the Area 39 PRH.
2.4.1.48 The three “C” Sites are restricted to a
maximum BH from +20mPD to +30mPD as stipulated on the Plan to ensure a
generally low-rise development south of the Hau Wong Temple.
E.
Government (Figure 2.9a and Figure 2.9b)
2.4.1.49 Areas zoned as Government (G) land uses include 1) Sports Ground; 2) Sports Centres; 3) Fire Station; 4) District Police Station & Married Police Quarters ; 5) General Clinic; 6) Salt Water Pumping Station; 7) Sewage Pumping Stations; 8) Government Reserve and 9) Attenuation Ponds and they are described in details as follows.
1) Sports Ground
TCE
2.4.1.50 “G0-1” is reserved for a standard sports
ground. It is intended to accommodate a seating capacity of about 10,000
spectators, and to provide a 400m track (all weather), a grass infield for
athletics, and a 11-a-side football pitch for high graded soccer matches. This
“G” Site is located at the eastern side of the RODP and is well-connected via
the waterfront promenade. This “G” Site is subject to a maximum BH of 3 storeys as indicated on Plan.
2) Sports Centres
TCE
2.4.1.51 “D0-2” and “F0-1” are reserved for sports centres. It is intended that the sports centres will provide a range of sports facilities such as badminton, squash, basketball, table tennis, fitness, dance and gymnastics. These “G” Sites are located along the major DO networks and is intended for integrated recreational, leisure and cultural development. The two “G” Sites are subject to a maximum BH of 5 storeys as indicated on Plan.
3) Fire Station
TCE
2.4.1.52 “G0-3” is reserved for a standard divisional fire station at the eastern side
of the RODP. This “G” Site is subject to a maximum BH of 9 storeys as indicated on Plan.
4) District Police Station & Married
Police Quarters
TCE
2.4.1.53 “C0-2” and “C0-3” are reserved for
district police station and married police quarters respectively at the eastern
side of the RODP. The “G” Sites are subject to a maximum BH of 16 storeys for the
district police station and +90mPD for the married police quarters.
5) General Clinic
TCE
2.4.1.54 “B0-3” is reserved for a general clinic
at the south-western side of the RODP, adjoining the existing Area 56. This “G”
Site allows flexibility to be developed into a joint-user complex with other
social welfare facilities when future need arises, subject to the agreement of
the Food and Health Bureau and Social Welfare Department. This “G” Site is
subject to a maximum BH of
5 storeys as indicated on Plan.
TCW
2.4.1.55 Site “TCV-i” is
reserved for a general clinic to the south of Hau Wong Temple. This “G” Site allows
the flexibility to be developed into a joint-user complex with other social
welfare facilities when future need arises, subject to the agreement of the
Food and Health Bureau and Social Welfare Department. This “G” Site is subject
to a maximum BH of 4
storeys as indicated on plan.
6) Salt Water Pumping Station
TCE
2.4.1.56 “D0-1” is reserved for a salt water
pumping station at the western waterfront of the RODP. The “G” Site is subject
to a maximum BH of 1
storey. The design of the salt water pumping station should include adequate
greening and to be integrated with the overall design of the waterfront
promenade.
7) Sewage Pumping Stations
TCE
2.4.1.57 “B0-4” and “C0-4” are
reserved for sewage pumping stations at the southern part of the RODP. The “G”
Sites are subject to a maximum BH of 1 storey.
TCW
2.4.1.58 “TCW-b”
located along Chung Yan Road (opposite to the Wong Nei Uk village) is zoned as
“G” to reflect the existing use of the Site as the Chung Yan Road Sewage
Pumping Station.
2.4.1.59 “TCV-b”, “TCV-d” and “TCV-f”
located within Tung Chung Valley are reserved for new sewage pumping stations to
serve the future population of the RODP. Development within these 3 “G” zones is
subject to a maximum BH
of 1 storey.
8) Government Reserve
TCE
2.4.1.60 “E0-4”,
with a size of about 7,000m2 is reserved for a government reserve to
allow land use flexibility when future need arises. This “G” Site is subject to
a maximum BH of 8 storeys
as indicated on the Plan.
TCW
2.4.1.61 “TCW-a” and “TCW-c”, both located along
the Chung Yan Road are reserved for government reserves to allow land use
flexibility when future need arises. There is an intention to provide
car-parking space in support of the revitalization of the Ma Wan Chung village
within Site “TCW-a” subject to detailed design.
9)
Attenuation
Ponds
TCW
2.4.1.62 5 Sites, namely “TCV-c”, “TCV-e”, “TCV-g”,
“TCV-k” and “TCV-n”, are
reserved for stormwater attenuation and treatment ponds. They are located immediately adjacent to each residential development
plot within Tung Chung Valley. The intention is to ensure each development area
within the sensitive Tung Chung Valley will be fitted with stormwater
attenuation and treatment ponds
to minimize the water quality issues due to surface runoff generated within new
urban development before discharging to Tung Chung Stream and to mitigate flood
risk.
F.
Education (Figure 2.10)
TCE
2.4.1.63 This zone is intended primarily for the
provision of education facilities to serve the needs of the population and
complementing provisions. Ten “E” zones are designated within the PDA.
2.4.1.64 Eight “E” sites for six 30-classroom primary
schools and two 30-classroom secondary schools for local and district needs are
reserved in the RODP and are subject to a maximum BH of 8 storeys as indicated on Plan.
2.4.1.65 Two “E” sites are located on the eastern edge
of the RODP is intended for a Post-Secondary Institution and Other School
Use. The two “E” sites are subject to a
maximum BH of 50mPD.
G.
Institution and Community (Figure 2.11)
TCW
2.4.1.66 Two
“IC” sites are planned with the RODP to reflect their existing uses, including
Hau Wong Temple (“TCV-h”) near Tung Chung Estuary and Prajna Dhyana Temple (“TCV-m”)
in Tung Chung Valley. Development within these “IC” sites is subject to a
maximum BH of their
existing number of storeys as stipulated on the Plan.
H.
Other Specified Uses (Figure
2.12a and Figure
2.12b)
2.4.1.67 This zone covers land allocated for the following specified uses:
1) Electricity Sub-Station
TCE
2.4.1.68 “B0-2” is reserved for an Electricity
Sub-Station at the southeastern side of the RODP. This “OU” Site is subject to
a maximum BH of 3 storeys
as indicated on the Plan.
2) Petrol Filling Station
TCE
2.4.1.69 “B0-5”
is reserved for a Petrol Filling Station at the southeastern side of the RODP,
on the other side of the Road P1
(Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section). This “OU” Site is subject to a maximum BH of 1 storey as indicated on the
Plan.
3) Boatyard and Maintenance Area
TCE
2.4.1.70 “F0-5”
is reserved for the development of a Boatyard and Maintenance Area at the
northern part of the RODP, immediately adjacent to and should be developed
together with the proposed marina. This “OU” Site is subject to a maximum GFA
of 4,000m2 and a maximum BH of 2 storeys as indicated on
the Plan. An unobstructed landscape area should be provided on the waterfront
park to connect the planned road junction to the “OU” site.
4) Railway Station
TCE
2.4.1.71 The proposed TCE railway station is a new
station on the Tung Chung Line situated next to the TCE development between
Sunny Bay Station and Tung Chung Station. The proposed railway station would
mainly serve the planned population in the PDA. This “OU” Site is subject to a maximum BH of 3 storeys as
indicated on plan.
5) Telephone Exchange
TCW
2.4.1.72 “TCV-j”,
locating to the south of the “COM-1” Site is reserved as the relocation site
for a Telephone Exchange (which was used to be located in Area 39). This “OU”
Site is subject to a maximum BH
of 11mPD as indicated on the Plan.
6) River Park
TCW
2.4.1.73 On the eastern tributary of Tung Chung Stream, from the YMCA of Hong Kong Christian College to Shek Mun Kap Road, will be developed into a “River Park” on both sides of the Tung Chung Stream for public recreational use and managed by the Drainage Services Department. Existing vegetation and trees shall be retained as much as practical.
2.4.1.74 As
highlighted in 2015 Policy Address, the Government is promoting the concept of
revitalising water bodies in large-scale drainage improvement works and
planning drainage works. It is proposed to de-channelize an existing
channelized section of Tung Chung Stream and develop together with the
immediate upstream natural section into a River Park for environmental
enhancement, eco-education and recreational uses. The proposed River Park aims
to promote eco-education by setting up viewing decks/ boardwalk, passive
recreation zone for appreciation of natural environment. The tentative
schematic layout is presented in Appendix 2.1 and further developments and refinements
would evolve during subsequent detailed design stage.
7) Polder
TCW
2.4.1.75 Elongated strips of land mainly along the
western tributaries of the Tung Chung Steam are reserved for polder scheme
within Tung Chung Valley. The intention of the polder scheme is to mitigate flood risk due to
anticipated high water level of Tung Chung Steam during extreme rain events.
2.4.1.76 To mitigate flood risk due to anticipated high water level of Tung Chung
Stream during extreme rain events, a total area of about 1.6ha is reserved
along Tung Chung Stream in the PDA at TCW for approximately 1.5m high embankments.
Although part of the polders near Mok Ka village and Shek Mun Kap village will
inevitably encroach onto the Fung Shui Woods with high ecological value
(approximately 0.16 ha), these concerned areas will still maintain as OU with
the consideration of safety concern of local communities. Ecological impacts
due to the erection of polder will be separately discussed in Section 9.5.
I.
Conservation Area (CA) (Figure 2.13)
2.4.1.77 This zoning is intended to protect and retain
the ecological features within Tung Chung Valley from the adverse effects of
development. It consists of two main
clusters. There is a general presumption against
development in this zone. In general, only developments that are needed to
support the conservation of the existing natural landscape or scenic quality of
the area or are essential infrastructure projects may be permitted.
TCW
2.4.1.78 The first cluster refers to the linear zones along the natural sections of the 2 main tributaries of Tung Chung Steam as well as the concourse near the outlet. Tung Chung Stream is recognized as an Ecologically Important Stream (EIS) by AFCD, and also houses the second most diverse stream fish communities in Hong Kong (only lower than Tai Ho Stream). This “CA” zone is to serve as an about 20-30m buffer (at certain intervals 10m-wide polder is included) separating the future development and the sensitive Tung Chung Stream. Next to Mok Ka Village existing built structures are in close proximity to the stream, therefore the buffer zone is limited to an approximate 15m. According to latest ecological survey, fish species of conservation importance, such as Beijiang Thick-lipped Barb which is only recorded in very limited locations in Hong Kong, are found in Tung Chung Stream. The proposed buffer zones (zoned as CA) would thus protect the riparian vegetation which are an integrated part of the stream ecosystem.
2.4.1.79 The second main cluster being the area surrounding Ngau Au Village. Buffer zones is planned on the northern and eastern edge of the Ngau Au Village for the protection of Tung Chung Steam. To the southwestern side of the Ngau Au Village, it is currently colonized by a woodland habitat. This woodland habitat is part of a large extent of woodland habitat extending from the western side of Ngau Au to San Tau, and thus should be preserved in the form of “CA”.
2.4.1.80 The third cluster refers to the area to the north of Shek Mun Kap village where Fung Shui Woods are identified. Due to the nature of Fung Shui Woods and the potential linkage between terrestrial fauna and natural environment, this area located adjacent to Shek Mun Kap Road should also be preserved as “CA”.
J.
Coastal Protection Area (CPA) (Figure 2.14)
2.4.1.81 This zoning is intended to conserve, protect
and retain the sensitive coastal natural environment of Tung Chung Bay. There
is a general presumption against development within the “CPA” zone. In general,
only developments that are needed to support the intention above or are
essential infrastructure projects with overriding public interest may be
permitted.
TCW
2.4.1.82 Species of conservation importance including horseshoe crab juveniles, seagrass beds, pipe fish, seahorse, etc. have been reported at Tung Chung Bay. The “CPA” north of Hau Wong Temple is intended to act as a buffer for the mudflat habitat in Tung Chung Bay which is of high ecological value. One part of the “CPA” zone is narrower to the NW of Hau Wong Temple since it is already occupied by an existing football pitch (Tung Chung Playground). There is also an existing camp site of Hong Kong Playground Association.
K.
Open Space (Figure
2.15a and Figure
2.15b)
2.4.1.83 Areas reserved as Open Space include
1) Regional Open Space; 2) District Open Space and 3) Local Open Space and they
are described in details as follows.
1)
Regional
Open Space
2.4.1.84 This
zone is intended for the provision of outdoor public space for active and/or
passive recreational uses. It mainly comprises the waterfront promenade along
the northern edge of the PDA, connecting with the existing waterfront promenade
in Tung Chung Town Centre.
TCE
2.4.1.85 Waterfront parks at northern and eastern edge
of the waterfront promenade is intended to serve as a focal point for
activities. Besides, a cycle park with an area of about 1.4ha is also proposed
at Road P1 (Tung Chung –
Tai Ho Section) intended to
connect with the proposed cycle tracks within the PDA.
2.4.1.86 The RO provides facilities including
pedestrian corridor, plazas, passive open spaces as well as various outdoor
recreational activities required under the HKPSG.
TCW
2.4.1.87 The “RO” along the northern part of the
future Town Park is planned as a pedestrian walkway to connect PDA with the
existing waterfront promenade in the Tung Chung Town Centre Area. This
pedestrian walkway is to be provided along the coastal area above high water
mark to avoid reclamation in Tung Chung Bay. Consideration may also be given
during detailed design stage to provide cycle track along this walkway (about
6m-7m) subject to further assessment on visual and environmental aspects. It should be noted that part of the “RO”
locating south of the “R3” site will include a structure required for railway
reserve.
2.4.1.88 The “RO” in the RODP mainly provides
facilities including pedestrian corridor, plazas, passive open spaces in
serving the population.
2) District Open Space
2.4.1.89 This zone is intended for the provision of
outdoor public space for active and/or passive recreational uses serving the
needs of the district population, distributed within the PDA along networks of
Linear Parks. The DO network creates a livable pedestrian environment for the PDA,
providing facilities including pedestrian corridor, plazas, passive open spaces
as well as various outdoor recreational activities required under the HKPSG.
TCE
2.4.1.90 Three major north-south Linear Parks with
landscaped facilities in the PDA are proposed, connecting the proposed TCE
railway station towards the waterfront promenade. The Linear Park system in
particular is envisioned as a multifunctional series of activity corridors that
enhance pedestrian connectivity by linking together residential neighbourhoods,
distribute open space throughout the development and provide an identifiable
open space network with activity nodes tailor-made for the PDA. Moreover, there is another east-west Linear
Park through the PDA connecting to the existing linear LO network at the
existing Tung Chung New Town.
2.4.1.91 In addition of the Linear Park system,
pocket parks with seating and sports activities are also provided. In the heart
of the PDA, a Central Green forms a shared meeting place for people from all
neighbourhoods. The space is flanked by retail activities on ground level
adding vibrancy to the area. Moreover, to enable smooth pedestrian access to the waterfront from the proposed
TCE railway station, the district distributor bisecting the PDA from east to
west is sunken along the Central Green to allow the creation of a pedestrian platform over its entire width. This
platform, which will form part of the continuous open space network in the PDA,
will enable pedestrians to walk uninterrupted northwards utilizing the open
space system as a safe and comfortable walking environment.
2.4.1.92 Shop fronts are concentrated along the Linear Parks and the Central Park
area of the pedestrian spines to create a unique activity node that would
otherwise be diffused with additional commercial frontage along the entire
length.
TCW
2.4.1.93 The
existing vegetated knoll is planned to be a Town Park serving both the planned
population of the RODP, as well as serving a direct landscape connection from Tung
Chung New Town to TCW. Due to the
topography constraints, the planned Town Park should be designed mainly for
passive recreational uses such as landscaped pedestrian corridors, viewing
deck, sitting-out area etc, and the design should pay attention to avoid impact
on and ensure compatibility with the historic features on the hill, including
the Tung Chung Battery, Tung Chung Game Board Carving and Fu Tei Wan
Kiln etc. There are some existing village houses, stilted waterfront features
and waterfront activities at this waterfront of this “DO”. To enhance its attractiveness for visitors, commercial and
dining facilities including gift-shop, area for alfresco dining maybe permitted
along this public open spaces. The unique character that symbolizes the
character of the Ma Wan Chung village should be preserved in the future design.
2.4.1.94 Another “DO” is located to the north of the
Yat Tung Estate, and immediately west of the Ma Wan Chung Village. This “DO” site
is intended to serve as a waterfront park with the spectacular view towards
Tung Chung Bay and the airport island.
Being highly accessible to residents and easily accessed by the proposed
TCW railway station, numerous active outdoor recreational facilities are
proposed at this location. Moreover, an outdoor performance venue is intended
to be provided within this “DO” to encourage activities and vibrancy of this
area and in response to public comments during the PE3.
2.4.1.95 A “DO” is located around Hau Wong Temple
along the waterfront of the Tung Chung Bay. This “DO” includes an existing 7-a-side
football pitch and the Tung
Chung Area Recreation Centre to west of the Hau Wong Temple. This “DO” to the eastern side of the Hau Wong Temple
will function as a passive open space, and provide an outdoor performance
venue for the temple or other local festive activities.
3) Local Open Space
TCE
2.4.1.96 Local Open Spaces to serve the local
residents is required within individual residential sites to provide activity
spaces and enhance the living environment requirement for local open space
provision under the HKPSG. Since they are to be provided within individual
residential sites, and they are not shown on the Plan.
L.
Green Belt (GB) (Figure 2.16)
2.4.1.97 This zone is mainly distributed within the
Tung Chung Valley, intended to preserve the existing topography and natural
vegetation as well as to provide a buffer between the urban development and the
countryside to its west. There is a general presumption against development in
the “GB” zone.
TCW
2.4.1.98 The GB zone along Tung Chung Road near Fong Yuen (in between “TCV-6” and
“TCV-7” Sites) is intended to maintain the integrity of the hydrological
linkage from the natural slopes to the wet abandoned agricultural land and
finally to Tung Chung Stream, which would in turn help the preservation of the
current core habitat of the rare butterfly.
2.4.1.99 Patches of Fung Shui Woods are scattered throughout Tung Chung Valley.
They are mostly situated close to the existing village-type development and
have both environmental and culture importance. To prevent these areas from
being developed in the future, they are zoned as GB and excluded from the
formulation of “V” boundaries.
M.
Agriculture (AGR) (Figure 2.17)
2.4.1.100 This zone covers land intended for
agricultural uses at areas in
between “V” zones and low-rise residential developments in the Tung Chung
Valley.
2.4.1.101 The AGR zones are mainly located around the
existing villages and intended to retain active and fallow arable land with
good potential for rehabilitation for cultivation, and to allow continuation of
existing farming practices.
N.
Roads (Figure 2.18a and Figure 2.18b)
2.4.1.102 About 23.19ha of land in TCE and 7.88ha in TCW are reserved for “RD”, which
comprises vehicular lanes, footpaths/ trails, road-side amenity areas and major transport facilities including bus
lay-bys, as well as amenity strips alongside roads to enhance the amenity and
to serve as visual buffers.
TCE
2.4.1.103 The road network in PDA at TCE will consist of primary, district and
local distributors. In general, the road configuration for primary and district
distributors will be either dual 2-lane or single 4-lane carriageway, while
local distributor will be single 2-lane road. The primary distributor will
connect to the North Lantau Highway through Tung Chung Eastern Interchange and
the proposed Tai Ho Interchange.
2.4.1.104 The primary distributor in TCE includes Tung Chung Waterfront Road, Ying
Hei Road and a new road named Road P1 (Tung Chung - Tai Ho Section) which will
serve as the primary east-west connection to and from North Lantau Highway. The
Road P1 (Tung Chung - Tai Ho Section) is proposed to be mainly an at-grade road
on reclamation. Grade separated
interchange, namely Tai Ho Interchange, in the form of elevated bridge
structures is proposed for connection to the North Lanatu Highway.
2.4.1.105 Connected to Road P1 in PDA at TCE are the district distributors: D1,
D2, D3 and D4. D1 together with D4 provide a link to the west of the PDA at
TCE, whereas D2 provides connection to the east. D3 is located in between D1
and D2 which provides a north-south link from Road P1 to the north of the
development. The remaining roads (L1-L10)
in the TCE development are local distributors that provide links to specific
land parcels within the development. All local distributors are assumed to have
one lane per direction. Modification to the road junctions at roads L3 and L16
are required to tie-with the proposed road network.
TCW
2.4.1.106 The road network in PDA at TCW will consist of district and local
distributors. In general, the road configuration for district distributor Chung
Mun Road will be a single 4-lane carriageway, while local distributors will be
single 2-lane road. The district distributor will connect to Yu Tung Road,
which connect further to North Lantau Highway via Tung Chung Eastern
Interchange.
2.4.1.107 In terms of existing roads in the vicinity of the PDA at TCW, Tung Chung
Road will be maintained as a two-lane (one lane each direction) rural road,
while Yu Tung Road (district distributor) and Chung Yan Road (local
distributor) will be two lanes per direction. Shek Mun Kap Road, which connects
to Tung Chung Road, is proposed to be widened from a single lane access track
to a single 2-lane carriageway.
2.4.1.108 PDA at TCW
is located immediately south-west of Tung Chung. Chung Mun Road will be
extended to serve as the district distributor in the development with two lanes
per direction. Chung Mun Road will connect the northern part of the development
to Yu Tung Road. There will be two local distributors (L30 and the improved
Shek Mun Kap Road) connecting the middle and southern part of the development
to Tung Chung Road respectively. A new local distributor (L29) connecting Chung
Mun Road and the improved Shek Mun Kap Road will form a corridor to connect
other local distributors (L24 – L28) to the external road network via Chung Mun
Road, L30 and Shek Mun Kap Road. The local distributors are also extended to
connect to existing villages including Ngau Au, Lam Che, Nim Yuen and Mok Ka. Although
a few sections of these local distributors (in a
form of bridge deck) will have to span over Tung Chung Stream and its
tributaries, only the footings of the bridge deck, which are considerably small
in size, will be located within the area above high water mark of the CA zone.
Considered that there is only relatively limited works for the footing
construction and the area affected would likely be the area above high water
mark with relatively less disturbance on ecological habitat, adverse impact is
thus not anticipated.
2.4.1.109 Regarding the northern portion of the development, Tung Chung Road
North, L21 and L31 will be local distributors while L31 will involve formation
of a new left-in-left-out vehicular access on Yu Tung Road.
2.4.1.110 In order to cater for the increased population within Tung Chung Valley,
Shek Mun Kap Road has to be widened from the existing one-way configuration to
two-way configuration to allow for the associated traffic demand. Given there
are already existing village houses erected at the southern side of Shek Mun
Kap Road, the proposed widening can only be made towards the northern side of
the road which will inevitably touch the existing Fung Shui Woods. Although
ecological constraints from natural habitat have been taken into account in the
design of road connection network in TCW, a minor encroachment onto the Fung
Shui Woods with approximately 0.04 ha in size is still inevitable due to
limited separation distance away from existing village houses. Ecological
impacts due to the road connection networks will be separately discussed in Chapter 9. Table 2.11 summarizes the lengths and number of
lanes of distributor roads involved in TCE
and TCW.
Table 2.11 Summary table of distributor roads involved in TCE and TCW
|
Internal Road |
Number of Lane |
Length (m) |
|
TCE |
||
|
Road D1 |
4 |
930 |
|
Road D2 |
4 |
790 |
|
Road D3 |
4 |
840 |
|
Road D4 |
4 |
220 |
|
Road L1 |
2 |
390 |
|
Road L2 |
2 |
730 |
|
Road L3 |
2 |
720 |
|
Road L4 |
2 |
460 |
|
Road L5 |
2 |
360 |
|
Road L6 |
2 |
300 |
|
Road L7 |
2 |
430 |
|
Road L8 |
2 |
110 |
|
Road L9 |
2 |
110 |
|
Road L10 |
2 |
80 |
|
Tung Chung Road North |
2 |
360 |
|
Chung Mun Road |
4 |
310 |
|
TCW |
||
|
Shek Mun Kap Road |
2 |
210 |
|
Road L22 |
2 |
120 |
|
Road L24 |
2 |
620 |
|
Road L25 |
2 |
350 |
|
Road L26 |
2 |
230 |
|
Road L28 |
2 |
320 |
|
Road L29 |
2 |
500 |
|
Road L30 |
2 |
290 |
|
Road L31 |
2 |
420 |
O.
Public Transport Interchanges (PTIs) (Figure 2.19a and Figure 2.19b)
TCE
2.4.1.111 Three PTIs are proposed in TCE. In support of the transport strategy to
promote the use of public transport facilities, three public transport
interchanges (PTIs) are proposed with one located at the “CDA” Sites of the
Metro Core Area, next to the proposed TCE railway station and the other two
located at the “RS” Sites of “B1-1” and “C2-2” at the eastern and western parts
of the RODP. The size of the PTI will be able to accommodate all public
transport traffic demands of the planning proposal. Sky bridges at both sides
of the PTI at the “CDA” Sites at the Metro Core Area are proposed to enhance
the connectivity between the development area and public transportation as well
as the proposed TCE railway station.
TCW
2.4.1.112 In TCW, there are 2 PTIs proposed with one located at the edge of the development
and next to the proposed TCW railway station and the other is an on-street bus
terminus located along Shek Mun Kap Road.
2.4.1.113 It is expected that majority of the residents would rely on the
road-based public transport services, either as the ultimate mode of transport
bringing them to their final destinations or just as feeder service. Hence,
sufficient road-based public transport facilities would have to be provided to
serve the development needs. Implementation of electric buses (e-buses) will be
promoted and space provision for charging facilities within the new PTI has
been reserved.
P.
Cycle Track Connections (Figures 2.20a and Figure 2.20b)
TCE
2.4.1.114 Cycling connectivity throughout the
Project is one of the key urban design concepts driving the configuration of
the spatial framework. Primarily the key cycling routes are located in parallel
to the open space area and within the Waterfront Promenade connecting directly
to the mass-transport facilities in TCE. It is considered that the cycling
facilities will create a pleasant, shaded environment that will enhance and
encourage the use of non-motorized transportation within the new development
areas.
TCW
2.4.1.115 In TCW, cycling routes are
strategically located either along the proposed waterfront promenade at Rocky
Lion Hill or in parallel to the road system. The consideration is to create
opportunities for residents living in Tung Chung valley to access the proposed
TCW Railway Station via walking and cycling. In addition, cycle tracks are
provided along Tung Chung Stream for leisure purposes and enjoyment of the
scenic character of TCW.
Table 2.12 Summary of table of cycle tracks
Q.
Cycle Park (Figure 2.21)
2.4.1.116 In order to facilitate the alignment
of Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section), approximately 9ha of reclamation to
the east of PDA at TCE will be required to cater for the loop shape of the
alignment. The inner space within the loop will be utilized and constructed in
a form of cycling park with an area of approximately 1.4ha. The cycle park is
intended to connect with the existing cycle tracks within Tung Chung to form a
comprehensive cycle track network.
R.
Infrastructure Outside RODP (Figure 2.22)
2.4.1.117 As mentioned in Chapter
1, a number of
associated infrastructures, which are located outside the boundary of the RODP,
would be required to support the development. They include:
·
An independent sewer network discharging directly
inside the inlet chamber of the existing Tung Chung Sewage Pumping Station
(TCSPS) / Siu Ho Wan Sewage Treatment Works (SHWSTW) without any connection and
interference to the existing sewers;
·
Two service reservoirs, including one for fresh
water and the other for flushing water, with capacities of 55,000 m3
and 11,000 m3 respectively; and
·
Associated modification to road junctions to tie-in
with proposed road network.
2.4.1.118 Relevant
environmental impact assessment for construction and operation of the above
associated infrastructures have been conducted under this EIA.
2.4.2 Summary of Environmental Considerations of RODP
2.4.2.1 A comparison of the development scale between that in the original EIA SB (i.e. ESB-251/2012) and the RODP is given in the table below.
Table
2.13 Comparison
of development scale between original EIA SB and RODP
|
|
Area in ha (Approximate) |
|
|
ESB-251/2012 |
RODP [1] |
|
|
PDA at TCE |
110 |
125 |
|
PDA at TCW |
175 |
120 |
|
Others |
|
|
|
· Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) |
- |
9 [2] |
|
Total: |
285 |
254 |
Remark:
[1] The PDA boundaries of TCE and TCW as shown in
RODP are identical to those presented in EIA SB (i.e. ESB-283/2014)
[2] A
reclamation of 8.6 ha in size is required
for Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section)
2.4.2.2 To conclude, as far as the reclaimed area is concerned, there is a large reduction in the reclaimed area as a result of 1) the deletion of 50ha reclamation in TCW to address public comments during PE process while 2) there is a need for the 9ha reclamation of Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section), and 3) the reclamation in TCE would be increased by 15ha. Taken into account the difference of land area between ESB-252/2012 and RODP, and the area occupied by the associated infrastructure outside PDA (~9 ha), the total development area has been reduced from 285ha to 254ha, with a reduction of approximately 31ha.
2.4.2.3 In fact, through the 3 stages of PE exercises, there have been lot of comments from different stakeholders. All of the comments have been duly considered and where appropriately addressed in the RODP as explained in Tables 2.4 to 2.6. A number of environmental considerations have been incorporated into the RODP to avoid and reduce environmental impacts at the outset. These environmental considerations include the following:
·
All reclamation in
TCW has been deleted;
·
Mudflats, mangrove
area, Country Park, SSSI have been avoided;
·
All graded
historic buildings and built heritages have been avoided;
·
Conservation Area
of about 10.42ha has been zoned along the natural section of Tung Chung Stream
and Coastal Protection Area of about 4.94ha has been zoned along the coastline
near Tung Chung Bay;
·
A River Park of about
3.3ha will be implemented to promote eco-education by setting up viewing decks/
boardwalk, passive recreation zone for appreciation of natural environment;
·
The existing
engineered channel section in Tung Chung Stream would be revitalised to connect
the natural section of Tung Chung Stream to Tung Chung Bay;
·
The marina has
been located as far away from both Tung Chung Bay and Tai Ho Bay and its scale
has been reduced;
·
Certain setback
distance has been allowed for residential developments from NLH;
·
Noise tolerant buildings have been located between
residential buildings and NLH as well as existing railway;
·
Central Park of about
4.8ha has been included in the plan in PDA at TCE.
2.4.2.4 However, despite all the efforts to avoid and minimise environmental impacts, the proposed development would still inevitably impact on some environmental resources. For example, road works and the polder system in TCW would inevitably encroach onto some Fung Shui Woods that are in close proximity (approx. 0.16ha due to polder and 0.04ha due to road works). Another example is that the proposed development would also cause loss in secondary woodland.
2.4.2.5 Section 3 to Section 12 of the EIA Report have identified all the environmental impacts such as air quality, noise, water quality, sewage and sewerage treatment implications, waste managements, land contamination, ecology, fisheries, landscape and visual, and cultural heritage, for both the construction and operational phases of the Project. Where necessary, all practicable and necessary mitigation measures are proposed for timely implementation.
2.5
Consideration of Alternatives
2.5.1
Background
2.5.1.1
Tung
Chung New Town Extension is situated in a unique position within the landscape
of Lantau Island. The Project is divided into two distinct zones with different
character and development potential based on their topographic context,
visibility from surrounding areas and accessibility.
2.5.1.2
TCE
is situated across the sea from HKIA, the Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities (HKBCF) and the new TMCLK link that are being constructed. Comprised
entirely of reclaimed land, development in TCE will be the natural continuation
of the existing Tung Chung New Town, framed against the vegetated backdrop of the
North Lantau (Extension) Country Park.
2.5.1.3
Development
in TCW balances the sensitive ecological character of Tung Chung Bay, Tung
Chung Stream and the rural topography of Tung Chung Valley with more intensive
development in the vicinity of the proposed TCW railway station. Residential
clusters nested within the valley are carefully located as distinct
micro-settlements integrated with the verdant vegetation and existing rural
village-type development.
2.5.1.4
Throughout
the design process of developing the RODP, extensive efforts have been paid to
consider alternatives for various design concept/ elements so as to achieve a
well-balanced and yet environmentally acceptable options. A summary of those
design concept elements is given below:
·
Marina in TCE;
·
Land
use themes in TCE;
·
Reclamation in TCW;
·
Revitalising the existing drainage channel along
Tung Chung Stream in TCW;
·
Polder scheme and stormwater attenuation and
treatment ponds in TCW;
·
Providing drainage system for TCW;
·
Providing sewerage connection for villages in TCW;
·
Land use zonings along Tung Chung Stream in TCW;
·
Land use zoning along coastline of TCW;
·
Optimizing building heights in TCE and TCW; and
·
Sites for services reservoirs at off-site area.
2.5.1.5
Obviously,
there are many other design elements in both TCE and TCW such as sport centres,
sewage pumping stations, a central park etc. as described in Section 2.4. All these have been
designed and located according to their initiated functions and catchment as
appropriate. Hence, design elements are not discussed item by item in terms of
consideration of alternatives.
2.5.2
Consideration of Alternatives for Marina
2.5.2.1
As discussed in Section 2.1.2.5, the northern part of TCE was designated as a
potential theme park development when the CFS was first envisioned in
1997. That potential theme park
development had an area of 40ha and remained the same until the Stage 1 PE (Note:
The first EIA SB (EIA SB No. ESB-251/2012) has considered this potential theme park
development).
2.5.2.2
During the Stage 1 PE, there were opinions that the
needs for the potential theme park should be revisited. One of the options considered would be to
include a marina of appropriate size.
The other alternative considered was to use that for residential development. A comparison of the benefits and dis-benefits
for those alternatives including theme park, marina, open space / GIC and
residential developments is given below.
Table 2.14 Comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for alternatives
|
Options |
Benefits |
Dis-benefits |
|
Possible Theme
Park development |
· Attract lot of tourists which would further improve the economic vibrancy of Tung Chung · Serve as an iconic location in Tung Chung New Town ·
Generate large number of employment
opportunities |
· A large area of 40ha would be occupied. ·
The traffic such as coaches and private cars
induced by the theme park would inevitably generate some concerns from or
nuisance to any residents in the vicinity (eg noise, traffic etc), especially
during evening periods and holidays during which the local communities may
prefer a quieter environment. |
|
Marina |
· Allow a seamless and coherent integration with the water front promenade · Serve as an iconic location in Tung Chung New Town |
· There are potential issues on the travelling vessels which would inevitably closer to the Chinese White Dolphin’s habitat (see Section 9.7 which has demonstrated that the impacts are acceptable) |
|
Open Space / GIC |
· Allow a seamless and coherent integration with the water front promenade ·
Depends on the actual uses, could serve as an
iconic location in Tung Chung New Town |
·
Less economic vibrancy as compared to marina
and theme park, and hence less employment opportunities |
|
Residential
development |
·
Additional area for residential development |
· Less economic vibrancy as compared to marina and theme park, and hence less employment opportunities · May not serve as an iconic location in Tung Chung New Town · Only limited integration with the waterfront promenade |
2.5.2.3
It can therefore been seen from the above table
that having a marina at the northern part of TCE would have the advantages of
generating higher economic vibrancy in that location and hence would provide
higher potential for employment opportunities. Although the employment
opportunities would be much less than that generated by a theme park, it would
have removed any potential concerns on the environmental issues that may be
experienced by the residential communities in close proximity. As compared to open space / GIC and
residential development, the proposed marina could provide better and more
coherent integration with the water front promenade and therefore generate
better economic vibrancy. Hence, after
considering all the pros and cons, a marina would be the preferred option among
the alternatives considered. Under the RODP, the number of berthing spaces to
be provided would be reduced to about 95 berths to allow space for public
waterfront activities.
2.5.3
Consideration of Alternatives for Land Use Themes
2.5.3.1
There have been altogether 3 stages of PE exercises
conducted during the formulation of RODP to
solicit public views on the Project throughout the Study. Apart from the original
design which has been presented in previous EIA SB (ESB No: ESB-251/2012), 2
themes, i.e. Theme 1: Livable Town and Theme 2: Economic Vibrancy, have been
considered as land use options in Tung Chung East. Details of these 2 themes
are summarised below.
Theme 1: Livable Town
2.5.3.2
The theme of
Livable Town is formulated based on the need of housing supply. Domestic Plot
Ratio 6 is adopted at certain focal areas to the southern part near the
proposed new railway station where accessibility is higher. The estimated
population for this theme would be 110,000, and it would be acceptable in terms
of infrastructural capacity, having taken into account the existing
developments and all the committed projects.
Theme 2: Economic Vibrancy
2.5.3.3
The aim of
this theme is to create a regional commercial hub in TCE alongside housing
supply. Apart from the provision of local commercial space, land is also
reserved for regional office and retail uses including waterfront retail and
dining areas, hotels, shopping malls and a marina.
2.5.3.4
A summary of
the key development parameters for the 2 themes is given in the following
table. Appendix 2.2 shows the PODP for these 2 themes which had been
presented during the PE.
Table
2.15 Summary of key development parameters between 2 themes of TCE
|
Key
development parameters |
Theme 1: Livable Town |
Theme 2: Economic Vibrancy |
|
Estimated
Population |
110,000 |
95,000 |
|
Estimated
No. of Flats |
38,000 |
33,000 |
|
Domestic
Plot Ratios |
3,
4, 5, 6 |
3,
4, 5 |
|
Non-Domestic
Plot Ratios |
1,
3 |
2.5,
3 |
|
Major
Land Uses (approx. ha) |
||
|
Residential
|
75 |
70 |
|
Government, Institution or Community Facilities |
14 |
13 |
|
Open Space |
19 |
17 |
|
Commercial |
7 |
15 |
|
Road
and Other Uses |
5 |
5 |
2.5.3.5
Throughout the PE process, there has been no major
objection to the proposed reclamation in TCE. Although some green groups
expressed concerns on the potential impacts on Tai Ho Wan and dolphin habitats,
and the potential impacts that may be caused by the Marina. (Note: the marina
at that time can accommodate 350 berths) (see Table 2.4-2.6 for more details on public comments). There is
support for both “Theme 1 – Livable Town” and “Theme 2 – Economic Vibrancy” in that population increase should be supported by corresponding
economic and job opportunities. A hybrid development of Themes 1 and 2 has therefore
been suggested and there is no major objection to the proposed development
scale for TCE although there are views that adequate urban design components
(e.g. visual corridor / air ventilation etc.) should be incorporated as appropriate.
Table 2.16 compares
the benefits and dis-benefits for land use themes in TCW.
Table
2.16 Comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for landuse themes in TCW
|
Option |
Benefits |
Dis-benefits |
|
Theme 1 (Livable Town) |
·
Supply more
land to fulfill the social need for residential uses |
·
Requires
reclamation in TCE ·
Potential for
less local employment opportunities and hence less traffic commuting with
other parts of HK for daily works |
|
Theme 2 (Economic Vibrancy) |
·
Potential for
more local employment opportunities and hence less traffic commuting with
other parts of HK for daily works |
·
Requires
reclamation in TCE ·
Supply less
land to fulfill the social need for residential uses |
|
Hybrid of Theme 1 and Theme
2 [1] |
·
Potential for
optimal local employment opportunities and hence optimal traffic commuting
with other parts of HK for daily works |
·
Requires
reclamation in TCE |
Remark:
[1]
represents the recommended option.
2.5.4
Consideration of Alternatives for Reclamations in
TCW
2.5.4.1
For the land use option in TCW, there has
been strong objections from local communities on the originally proposed
reclamation (~50 ha as presented in the Stage 1 PE) as it would encroach onto
Tung Chung Bay with rich ecological resources. As such, an option having
limited reclamation of 14ha to the north eastern part of the Tung Chung Bay
with relatively lower ecological value was incorporated into the draft RODP presented
in the Stage 2 PE activities. Areas of higher ecological importance including
coastal areas of Tung Chung Bay and along the Tung Chung Stream had already
been preserved at that time.
2.5.4.2
However, there were still strong
objections from the stakeholders against the proposed 14 ha reclamation in TCW
due to concerns on ecological, landscape, visual and environmental. The 14 ha reclamation in TCW
was subsequently removed from the revised RODP presented in the Stage 3
PE. Hence, it can be seen that the options
of having different scale of reclamation, including no reclamation in TCW have
been fully considered throughout the process. A latest summary of the key
development parameters of TCW is given in Table
2.17. A comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for reclamation in
TCW
is summarized in Table 2.18.
Table
2.17 Summary of key development parameters of TCW
|
Key
development parameters |
TCW |
|
Estimated
Population |
25,500 |
|
Estimated
No. of Flats |
8,600 |
|
Domestic
Plot Ratios |
1,
1.5, 3, 5, 6 |
|
Non-Domestic
Plot Ratios |
2
- 3 |
|
Major
Land Uses (approx. ha) |
|
|
Residential |
27.95 |
|
Government, Institution or Community Facilities |
5.02 |
|
Open Space |
24.7 |
|
Commercial |
1.12 |
|
Conservation Related Uses |
28.6 |
|
Village and Others |
31.96 |
Table
2.18 Comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for reclamation in TCW
|
Option |
Benefits |
Dis-benefits |
|
With a 50ha reclamation |
·
Supply more
land to fulfill the social need for residential uses |
·
Direct impacts
on the coastal area and estuary of Tung Chung Stream |
|
With a 14ha reclamation |
·
Supply less
land to fulfill the social need for residential uses |
·
Direct impacts
on the coastal area and estuary of Tung Chung Stream |
|
Without any reclamation [1] |
·
No direct
impacts on the coastal area and estuary of Tung Chung Stream |
·
Supply least
land to fulfill the social need for residential uses |
Remark:
[1] represents
the recommended option.
2.5.5
Consideration of Alternatives for Revitalising the
Existing Drainage Channel along Tung Chung Stream
2.5.5.1
As discussed in Section 1.8, a section of approximately 0.5km long of the original
Tung Chung Stream had been channelized in 2004 for flood control purposes. While this channelized section serves as a
mitigation measures to protect the local communities from flood risk, it has
broken up the ecological connection between the natural section of Tung Chung
Stream upstream and Tung Chung Bay downstream.
2.5.5.2
A total of 3 development options has been
considered for this channelized section, including 1) No change to the current
channelized section; 2) dechannelize this section without any specific uses;
and 3) dechannelize this section and revitalise it to become a river park.
2.5.5.3 Obviously, Option 1 would not help improve the ecological resources of Tung Chung Stream although it would not cause any impacts to Tung Chung Stream as well. Option 2 would restore the ecological connection between the upstream Tung Chung Stream and the Tung Chung Bay. This would definitely be a major ecological improvement although the flood risk could be managed by the installation of polder systems as explained in Section 2.4. Option 3 further enhances the performance of Option 2 by introducing elements of eco-education such as viewing decks/ boardwalk and passive recreation zone for appreciation of natural environment into the design and turn it into a river park. Option 3 would have obvious advantages over the other 2 options considered and hence has been selected as the preferred option. A summary of comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for revitalizing the existing drainage channel along Tung Chung Stream is given below.
Table 2.19 Comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for revitalizing the existing drainage channel along Tung Chung Stream
|
Option |
Benefits |
Dis-benefits |
|
As per existing arrangement |
·
No impacts to
Tung Chung Stream |
·
No improvements
to ecological resources of Tung Chung Stream |
|
Revitalise existing
drainage channel without specific uses |
·
Restore the
ecological connection between the upstream Tung Chung Stream and Tung Chung
Bay |
·
Some minor construction
works would be inevitable ·
No
opportunities to promote eco-education |
|
Revitalise existing
drainage channel as part of River Park [1] |
·
Restore the
ecological connection between the upstream Tung Chung Stream and Tung Chung
Bay ·
Introduce opportunities
to promote eco-education |
·
Some minor
construction works would be inevitable |
Remark:
[1]
represents the recommended option.
2.5.6
Consideration of Alternatives for Polder Scheme and
Stormwater Attenuation and Treatment Ponds in TCW
2.5.6.1 The PDA at TCW falls within the catchment of Tung Chung Stream in Tung Chung Valley. According to the requirements as stipulated in the DSD Storm Drainage Manual, flood impact assessment has to be carried out to assess the potential flood risk of Tung Chung Stream adjacent to the proposed new extension area under this project. Based on the flood impact assessment, a number of locations along Tung Chung Stream including Shek Lau Po, Mok Ka, Shek Mun Kap etc. have been identified to have potential flooding risk under different return periods. Mitigation measures are hence required to reduce the flood risk of the proposed development area and existing villages to acceptance level. Though approximately 0.16ha of Fung Shui Woods would inevitably be encroached inside Tung Chung Valley under the current RODP (see Section 2.4.1.76), shifting of polder alignment and location to avoid the Fung Shui Woods is considered not feasible as both sides of the polder are bounded by village boundaries and CA zone. Further shifting towards Tung Chung Stream will result in further encroachment on CA zone which is not preferable from environmental point of view.
2.5.6.2 In general, a consideration of strategies including 1) river training, 2) diversion of water, 3) provision of flood detention scheme and 4) rising land platform for the development would be adopted to mitigate against flooding in Hong Kong. However, the unique characteristic of Tung Chung Stream and TCW have limited the application of the most these solutions as described below:
Option
1 - River Training
2.5.6.3 River training always includes excavation to increase the width and depth of the river or straighten local section of the river to enhance its flow capacity. However, as discussed in Section 9.3, Tung Chung Stream is well-known as one of the rivers in Hong Kong with high ecological value and it has been recommended to keep as intact as possible. Any works within the Stream bed such as excavation works for river training would lead to significant impact to its existing condition and ecology. In addition, it is also planned to zone an about 30m buffer from the stream as Conservation Area against any development and impact to the stream. River training is hence considered inapplicable for Tung Chung Stream except a short part of channelized section.
Option 2 - Diversion of Water
2.5.6.4 As mentioned above, Tung Chung Stream is well-known with high ecological and landscape value in Hong Kong. Diversion of significant portion of water from Tung Chung Stream may change the water environment of the Stream that will lead to significant impact to the established ecological system and landscape characteristics along the stream and the area within close proximity. Diversion of the water from Tung Chung is hence considered inapplicable for Tung Chung Stream as flood mitigation measures.
Option 3 – Provision of Flood Detention
Scheme
2.5.6.5 The provision of the detention ponds to store excess stormwater temporarily in the detention pond for reducing the peak flow severe rainfall events can help to relieve part of the flooding concerns. However, unless large areas of land around the river is used for the pond, which will involve consideration scale of the earthworks near the river and sterilize a large amount of land originally planned for development, sole provision of flood detention pond would not be able to mitigate all the identified flood risk along Tung Chung Stream.
Option 4 - Rising Land Platform
2.5.6.6
Site formation works including the rise of the land
platform of the proposed new extension area is usually the most practicable way
to mitigate the flooding concern. In Tung Chung Valley, most of the land
around the Stream is owned by individual private owners. Given the need to
minimize land resumption as much as possible, it is necessary to allow
individuals to initialize the development of their land lots after the
rezoning. This arrangement limits the feasibility of the large scale site
formation works to rise the entire area of concern to avoid flooding. In
addition, with the presence of the adjacent existing villages, solely rise of
the land platform for the new development would worsen the possible flooding
risk of the adjacent developed village areas where site formation works is
infeasible. Hence, it is considered that the large scale site formation works
in term of rising land platform is not applicable in Tung Chung Valley.
Recommendations
2.5.6.7 With the consideration of the above-mentioned constraints, a polder scheme, which includes the construction of a perimeter (earth) bund to prevent ingress of flood water into the low-lying area and a pumping station to discharge the flood water within the bund to the nearby river, is hence proposed to the concerned areas with flood risk based on this stage of assessment. The estimated maximum height of the bund as part of the polder scheme will be up to 1.5m subject to the existing topography of the concerned areas. More details of the polder system will be further developed during the detailed design stage. A summary of comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for polder scheme and stormwater attenuation and treatment ponds in TCW is given below.
Table 2.20 Comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for polder scheme and stormwater attenuation and treatment ponds in TCW
|
Option |
Benefits |
Dis-benefits |
|
Option 1 (River Training) |
·
Effective means
to alleviate flood risk |
·
Requires
extensive excavation and hence adverse impacts on ecology and landscape
resources |
|
Option 2 (Diversion of Water) |
·
Effective means
to alleviate flood risk |
·
Results in
significant change in water environment and hence adverse impacts on ecology
and landscape resources |
|
Option 3 (Provision of Flood
Detention Scheme) |
·
Effective means
to alleviate flood risk |
·
Large area is
required for the flood detention ponds ·
Construction of
flood detention ponds would have certain impacts on ecology and landscape resources |
|
Option 4 (Rising Land Platform) |
·
Effective means
to alleviate flood risk |
·
Site formation
would have certain impacts on ecology and landscape resources |
|
Combination of Options 2, 3
& 4 [1] |
·
Effective means
to alleviate flood risk |
·
Still some
minimal residual impacts on ecology and landscape resources |
Remark:
[1] represents the recommended option.
2.5.7
Consideration of Alternatives for Providing
Drainage System for TCW
2.5.7.1
New developments would inevitably bring additional
surface runoff. For the proposed development
in TCW in particular, the issue of additional runoff discharged into Tung Chung
Stream has been cautiously considered from environmental perspective.
2.5.7.2
The existing catchment at TCW has an area of about
11km2. It includes the
upstream vegetated catchment of the North and South Lantau Country Park with
scattered villages and the downstream urban catchment of Tung Chung New Town.
Tung Chung Stream is the main river network serving the catchment areas and it
discharges downstream to Tung Chung Bay. According to the location of DSD
flooding blackspots as at March 2015 available from DSD website, there is no
DSD flooding blackspot within the vicinity of the Project.
2.5.7.3
Unlike the conventional drainage system in which surface
runoff would pass through gullies to filter off dirt and debris and then
discharged into the receiving water bodies, the proposed Sustainable Urban
Drainage System (SUDS) within TCW includes a number of new and innovative
features to address the concerns of
possible impacts on the ecology of Tung
Chung Stream and the downstream estuary (See Section 9 for more details). According to the latest design,
the new system would include the provision of a series of regional stormwater
attenuation and treatment ponds. During rainfall events, flows will be directed
into the stormwater attenuation and treatment ponds which are capable of managing peak flows
and removing pollutants. Runoff from the proposed development areas
will be directed towards onsite stormwater attenuation and treatment ponds. The
ponds will have a vegetated wetland zone and permanent pool, which will create
valuable open space amenity and increase biodiversity. The water in the stormwater
attenuation and treatment ponds will drain by gravity during small rain events
and via high flow pumping stations during heavy rainfall events. The capacity
of those stormwater attenuation and treatment ponds would vary from 3,000 –
5,000m3, depending on the catchments to be served.
2.5.7.4
Runoff from roadways, parcels, and existing
villages will be diverted via dedicated pipe network and discharged to a
primary sedimentation zone. Runoff will be slowed down to allow sediment to
settle out. Retaining sediment at the forebay rather than in the larger
detention zone will allow for easier removal, thus minimize maintenance costs.
2.5.7.5
At the opposite end of the sedimentation zone,
runoff will enter a wide and shallow biofiltration wetland zone. Treatment action
will occur as stormwater travels slowly through dense, climate-appropriate
landscaping, removing floating debris and encouraging the uptake of nutrients
by the plants. Following the biofiltration wetland zone, treated flows will be
discharged into the permanent pool or attenuation zone.
2.5.7.6
During large rainfall events, high flows will
bypass the sedimentation zone and biofiltration wetland zone and be directed
into the attenuation zone. This zone will contain high- and low-flow weirs to
mitigate peak flows due to the planned development, keeping the rate of
discharge to the Tung Chung Stream at or below the existing condition
2.5.7.7
A total of 2 options have been considered,
including the conventional approach and the sustainable drainage systems
comprising of a series of regional stormwater attenuation and treatment ponds.
2.5.7.8
As compared to the conventional approach, the
sustainable drainage system would offer more advantages to filter as much as
pollutant in the surface runoff. It is
therefore considered more favourable to adopt the sustainable drainage system
in TCW. The conceptual drawings of the sustainable urban drainage system are
shown in Appendix 2.3. The comparison of benefits and
dis-benefits for providing drainage system in TCW is summarized below.
Table 2.21 Comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for providing drainage system in TCW
|
Option |
Benefits |
Dis-benefits |
|
Conventional
approach with surface runoff discharged to Tung Chung Stream |
·
Require less
land area for implementation ·
Require less
land area for implementation |
·
Pollutants in
surface run-off will not be filtered |
|
Sustainable
urban drainage system to filter Surface runoff before discharged to Tung
Chung Stream [1] |
·
Pollutants in
surface run-off will be filtered as much as practicable and hence impacts on
Tung Chung Stream will be minimized as much as practicable |
·
Require more
land area for implementation ·
Require more
maintenance to ensure effectiveness |
Remark:
[1]
represents the recommended option.
2.5.8
Consideration of Alternatives for Providing
Sewerage Connection for Villages in TCW
2.5.8.1
The proposed sewerage system comprises construction
of SPSs, separate sewerage connections in the form of gravity sewer which runs
along Tung Chung Road, Yu Tung Road and future development roads connecting to
existing SPSs. For each of the
villages at Shek Mun Kap, Ma Wan Chung, Wong Nai Uk, Mok Ka, Nim Yuen, Lam Che,
Ngau Au and Shek Lau Po, a proper village sewerage system would be provided to
facilitate the villagers for the connection to the public sewer as appropriate. With the
implementation of proper separate sewerage system, it is anticipated that the
existing conditions of Tung Chung Stream could be significantly improved. As
compared to the option of maintaining the existing systems, the current option
would provide an opportunity to improve the water quality in Tung Chung Stream.
Table 2.22 summarizes
a comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for providing sewerage
connection for villages in TCW.
Table 2.22 Comparison
of benefits and dis-benefits for providing
sewerage connection for villages in TCW
|
Option |
Benefits |
Dis-benefits |
|
As per existing arrangement |
·
Require no
construction works in the vicinity of the villages |
·
Any existing
sewage from villages may, if not properly discharged to
Tung Chung Stream,
affect water quality |
|
Provide sewerage connection
[1] |
·
Sewage from
villages could be connected to the new sewer system and hence reduce the
pollution loading discharged to Tung Chung Stream |
·
Require minor
construction works in the vicinity of the villages |
Remark:
[1] represents the recommended option.
2.5.9
Consideration of Alternatives for Land use Zonings
Along Tung Chung Stream
2.5.9.1
Tung Chung Stream has been known for its
biodiversity and ecological values, and landscape resources. The ecological surveys conducted under this
study has also confirmed its importance (see Section 9 for more details of the ecological surveys).
2.5.9.2
In terms of landuse zoning for conservation, there
are 2 possible zonings, including Green Belt (GB) and Conservation Area (CA). The
planning intention of GB zone is primarily for defining limits of urban and
sub-urban development areas by natural features and to provide passive
recreational outlets. In comparison, CA would require a more stringent planning
intention which aims to protect and retain the ecological features of important
items from adverse effect of development.
2.5.9.3 CA would provide a better planning protection of Tung Chung Stream and hence has been adopted as the zoning for the area along the Tung Chung Stream except for the section of engineered channel which would be revitalized and the River Park). The total area of CA along Tung Chung Stream is approximately 10ha. A summary of comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for land use zonings along Tung Chung Stream is given below.
Table 2.23 Comparison
of benefits and dis-benefits for land use zonings along Tung Chung Stream
|
Option |
Benefits |
Dis-benefits |
|
Zoned as GB |
·
Provide certain
planning protection of Tung Chung Stream |
·
Relatively less
protection for Tung Chung Stream |
|
Zone as CA (except for the
engineered channel which would be revitalized) [1] |
·
Provide better
planning protection of Tung Chung Stream |
·
Less
development scope for area zoned as CA |
Remark:
[1]
represents the recommended option.
2.5.10
Consideration of Alternatives for Land Use Zonings
Along Coastline of TCW
2.5.10.1 Similar to
Tung Chung Stream, the natural coastline of TCW has been identified to have
high rich ecological and landscape resources such as mangroves and mudflats.
The development has avoided physical encroachment onto these mangroves and
mudflats. A total of 3 possible land use zoning options including GB, CA and
Coastal Protection Area (CPA) have been considered.
2.5.10.2 The
planning intention of GB and CA zone has been described in Section 2.5.5, while CPA is intended to conserve, protect and
retain the natural coastline and the sensitive coastal natural environment.
2.5.10.3 For the coastline to the west of Wong Lung Hang Nullah, ecological surveys have confirmed that the conditions of the mangroves and mudflats are more intact and thus a CPA zoning is therefore proposed to separate the proposed development from habitats with high ecological value. For the natural coastline to the east of Wong Lung Hang Nullah, however, the size of the patch of mangroves is smaller with close distance with the existing urbanised land. Though RO zone is proposed to the east with encroachment onto the small patch of mangroves, the importance of mangroves have been put into consideration and the actual pathway lying within the RO zone is designed to totally avoid the mangrove footprint. A summary of comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for land use zonings along coastline is given below.
Table
2.24 Comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for land use
zonings along coastline
|
Option |
Benefits |
Dis-benefits |
|
No special zoning |
·
More
development scope for coastal area |
·
No planning
protection to suit the habitats along the coastline |
|
Combination of GB, CA, CPA
and RO [1] |
·
Provide an
optimal planning protection to suit the habitats along the coastline |
·
Less
development scope for coastal area |
Remark:
[1] represents the recommended option.
2.5.11
Consideration of Alternatives for Optimising Building
Height
2.5.11.1 Urban design principles raised by the public are also incorporated into the planning and design principle for the RODP in which stepped building height from inland towards the waterfront will be maintained. In TCE, the building heights near the coastline are approximately 40m and the building heights will increase to 195m towards the proposed railway station. Similarly, for TCW, the building heights near the proposed railway station are 70m and the height would decrease to 25m especially in the vicinity of existing villages. As compared to the options of having more uniform building height, the current option of having stepped building height would avoid “wall effect” developments along the coastal area as far as possible. A summary of comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for optimising building height is given below.
Table
2.25 Comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for optimising building height
|
Option |
Benefits |
Dis-benefits |
|
More uniform building
height across different land lots |
·
Nil |
·
“Wall effect” developments along the coast
line as far as possible |
|
Stepped building height
from inland towards the waterfront [1] |
·
Avoid and
minimize “wall effect” developments along the coast line as far as possible |
·
Nil |
Remark:
[1] represents the recommended option.
2.5.12
Consideration of Alternatives for Sites for Service
Reservoirs
2.5.12.1 As
discussed in Section 2.4, the RODP
would introduce an additional population of approximate 144,400 to Tung Chung New
Town. This additional population and
associated employment would definitely require additional supply of both fresh
water and flush water. According to the
current findings of engineering studies, it is essential to have new services
reservoirs, including one for fresh water and one for flush water.
2.5.12.2 The proposed locations for these services reservoirs are in the vicinity of the existing reservoirs along Wong Lung Hang Road. The advantages of this option is that the existing access road would be utilised and there is no need to construct another access road which would inevitably require extensive site formation work and hence cause additional habitat loss. Besides, some of the site formation works at that location have been constructed decades ago during the construction of the existing reservoirs and hence the additional amount of spoil and trees to be removed would be less. It should also be noted that the service reservoirs were originally proposed at Tai Ho area in the CFS conducted in 1997. However, considering the rich ecological resources in Tai Ho area, alternative location within the North Lantau (Extension) Country Park was considered as the service reservoir has to be built on hillsides to provide sufficient elevation difference for water flow. However, in order to address the public concerns on works within country parks, the service reservoirs are now proposed to locate next to the existing service reservoirs in which some of the site formation work has been previously constructed. This would definitely reduce the disturbance to the natural habitat around that area. A summary of comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for service reservoirs is given below.
Table
2.26 Comparison of benefits and dis-benefits for service reservoirs
|
Option |
Benefits |
Dis-benefits |
|
Away from the existing
services reservoirs |
·
Nil |
·
Need for
another access road and more construction works ·
More C&D
material generated ·
More habitat
loss |
|
In the vicinity of the
existing services reservoirs [1] |
·
No need for
another access road and hence less construction works ·
Less C&D
material generated ·
Less habitat
loss |
·
Nil |
Remark:
[1]
represents the recommended option.
2.6
Proposed Construction
Methodologies for Land Uses and Design
2.6.1.1
Section 2.4 has
presented the key elements for the RODP. The construction methodologies for
these key elements have been duly examined to take into account of many
considerations including environmental consideration, practicability etc. The
recommended construction methodology of different key construction works are
summarized below. Section 2.7
summarises the consideration of alternatives for these construction
methodologies.
2.6.2
Reclamation
2.6.2.1 As discussed in Section 2.3, the reclamation in TCW has been deleted. However, there would still be a reclamation above high water mark of 120.5ha for TCE and 8.6 ha for the Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section). For the reclamation in TCE, a non-dredged approach has been recommended to minimise environmental impacts. However, while dredging work has been preferably avoided, filling work would be inevitable. The actual construction sequences and processes of main reclamation filling shall be further developed by the contractor but the envisaged construction processes of the adopted drained reclamation summarised below:
1.
Installation of
the silt curtain;
2.
Laying of
geotextile and sand blanket over the marine sediment (i.e. over the existing
seabed) prior to reclamation filling;
3.
Installation of
band drains by marine based method to accelerate the consolidation of marine
sediment;
4.
Construction of
seawall to allow at least 200m leading edge before reclamation filling;
5.
Underwater filling
from sand blanket to +2.50mPD;
6.
Land filling from
+2.50mPD to formation level; and
7.
Surcharging (including
construction and removal)
2.6.2.2 The above major processes are described in more details as below:
1.
Installation of the Silt Curtain;
2.6.2.3
A perimeter silt curtain enclosing the
reclamation site will be installed during the whole construction period. A
second layer of silt curtain will be installed near the active stone column
installation. At the marine assess, staggered layers of silt curtain will be
provided to reduce sediment loss migrating across the silt curtain system.
2.
Laying
of Geotextile and Sand Blanket
2.6.2.4
Laying of geotextile and sand blanket over the
marine sediment over the existing seabed shall be carried
out prior to reclamation filling as one of the measures to prevent mud wave.
2.6.2.5
In order to prevent the mud wave, deposition of the
sand blanket shall be carried out in layers not exceeding 0.5m thick, with a
leading edge between consecutive layers. The minimum length of the leading edge
required would usually in the order of 5-10m and would be subject to further
development during the detailed design stage, taking into account various seabed
material strength parameters.
2.6.2.6
In laying of geotextile, tight connection must be
ensured between geotextile sheetings (usually by sewing or stapling for woven
geotextile, and thermal bonding for non-woven geotextile) to form geotextile
panels up to the limit that can be handled by marine craft. The overlapping
between geotextile panels must also be adequate (typical 1-2m).
3. Installation of Band Drain
2.6.2.7 Band drains will be installed by barges equipped with installation equipment. The drains are instated by pushing a rectangular hollow steel mandrel into the seabed statically by the weight of the installation unit. If hard material is encountered, penetration will be assisted with vibration by hydraulic vibrator. Rising of the mandrel will only be permitted after completion of a drain installation.
4. Construction
of Seawall to allow at least 200m Leading Edge before Reclamation Filling
2.6.2.8
Detailed construction sequence for seawall refers
to Section 2.6.3 below.
5. Underwater
Filling (up to +2.50mPD);
2.6.2.9
Underwater filling will be carried out by various
methods such as derrick barge and tug boat depending on the availability of
working space, water depth and types of fill materials. Public
fill, sand fill or a mix of sand fill and public fill will be adopted as the
underwater filling materials subject to the availability of these materials. Public fill
(if available) will be used as far as possible as one of the key fill materials
for reclamation filling. Leading edge seawall of at least 200m long shall be
allowed before the commencement of the underwater filling.
2.6.2.10 To prevent
occurrence of mud wave, underwater reclamation fill will need to be deposited
in thin layer with adequate leading edge between consecutive layers; (commonly
in one-meter thick for each layer and 10 to 15 metres for the minimum leading
edge subject to the design).
6.
Above water filling from +2.50mPD to
formation level;
2.6.2.11 Deposition of fill materials for land filling will be carried out by various methods such as dump truck, derrick barge, pelican barge, bulldozer and excavator depending on the availability of access, working space, water depth and types of fill materials. Public fill, sand fill or a mix of sand fill and public fill will be adopted as the above water filling materials subject to the availability of these materials. Public fill (if available) will be used as far as possible as one of the key fill materials for reclamation filling. Vibratory rollers will be used to compact the fill after filling to the required degree of compaction.
7. Surcharging
2.6.2.12 Surcharge
will be built up similar to those of above water filling. Public fill (if
available) will be used as the surcharge materials. Surplus surcharge materials
at the completion of the project shall be disposed off site. During each
stage of land formation, surcharge removed from a completed works area will be
reused as fill material in other active works areas, thereby minimising the
amount of surplus surcharge material that needs to be disposed of offsite after
completion of all land formation.
2.6.3
Seawall Construction
2.6.3.1
The details of construction sequences and
processes of seawalls shall be further developed by the contractor but the
envisaged construction processes of the adopted seawall options are summarized
below. To minimize the water
quality impact during the construction stage, the reclamation work would
normally only be commenced after the adjacent seawalls (~200m in length) are
completed.
2.6.3.2 The envisaged construction processes for non-dredged seawall with pipe pile structure supported by ground improvement - stone column are listed as follows:
1.
Installation of
the silt curtain (if not in-place);
2.
Lay geotextile and
deposit rock fill (gravel) blanket;
3.
Install stone
columns by marine based plant;
4.
Install pipe pile
structures;
5.
Fill inside pipe
pile structures;
6.
Install corrosion
protection system (if necessary) and construct capping beam/ connecting tie;
7.
Construct sloping
berm in front of pipe pile structure (if necessary).
2.6.3.3 The sectional details of the seawall are designed in accordance with different climate wave conditions and seabed level. In some local area with shallow water depth, the pipe pile structure may not be required and the seawall can be mainly supported by ground improvement - stone column. The envisaged construction processes of sloping seawall and vertical seawall are listed as follows.
|
Sloping Seawall supported by Stone Column |
Vertical Seawall supported by Stone
Column |
|
1. Installation of the silt curtain (if not in-place); 2. Lay geotextile and deposit rock fill (gravel) blanket; 3. Install stone columns by marine based plant; 4. Deposit rock fill core material on top of the rockfill layer; 5. Place the underlayers; 6. Place the armour rock; 7. Install the bermstones; & 8. Construct the coping |
1. Installation of the silt curtain (if not in-place); 2. Lay geotextile and deposit rock fill (gravel) blanket; 3. Install stone columns by marine based plant; 4. Place the leveling stones; 5. Place the pre-fabricated concrete blockwork elements; 6. Deposit filter layers at the back of concrete blocks; & 7. Construct the coping |
2.6.3.4 The key construction processes for typical seawall are described in more details below:
1.
Installation of the Silt Curtain;
2.6.3.5
A perimeter silt curtain enclosing the
reclamation site will be installed during the whole construction period. A
second layer of silt curtain will be installed near the active stone column
installation. At the marine access, staggered layers of silt curtain will be
provided to reduce sediment loss migrating across the silt curtain system.
2.
Lay geotextile and deposit rock fill
(gravel) blanket;
2.6.3.6 A layer of geotextile and stone blanket of approximate 2m thick shall be installed on the existing seabed prior to installation of stone columns. The stone blanket serves the purpose of preventing the bulging of the top part of stone columns.
3.
Installation of Stone Columns
2.6.3.7
Stone columns are generally installed to facilitate
the consolidation of marine sediment and improve the strength
of the marine sediment layer. The sizes and the
details of the stone columns shall be determined during detailed design.
4.
Installation of Pipe Pile Structure
2.6.3.8 For pipe pile structure, the pipe pile could be pre-fabricated off-site and then toward to the installation point for installation using vibrators. It is envisaged the pre-fabricated process will be conducted outside HK and the pile structure will be transported by barges to site. When delivered to site, temporary guide frames may be installed on site in advance to secure the alignment of the pipe pile as necessary.
5.
Deposition of
Fill Materials
2.6.3.9
A geotextile and sand blanket layer will be deposited on top of the
seabed acting as filter and buffer between the founding stratum and the rock core,
as well as for the control of mud wave.
A leading length of approximately 200m is allowed for seawall
construction.
2.6.3.10
After the fill has been formed at around –2.5mPD, a bottom-split barge
would no longer be applicable in depositing the fill material. A derrick barge would be employed to continue
the rock filling works and subsequently the underlayer as well as the
protective armour rock layer. The
derrick barge would also assist in depositing the filter layer at the back of
the seawall before depositing the sand fill in the reclamation areas.
6.
Installation of Seawall Underlayers &
Rock Armour
2.6.3.11 The seawall rock armour and underlayers
should be placed from the bottom to the top of each section with the aid of
derrick barges. This could ensure that
individual rock pieces interlock with each other and do not segregate and the
interstices are kept free of small rock fragments. These requirements are particularly important
as they relate directly to the design assumptions covering stability against
wave attack and wave run-up.
2.6.3.12
Armour is the most important layer for the
stability of the rubble mound. The
armour layer should be placed as soon as possible following the placement of
the underlayer to avoid damage to these layers. Each armour should be inspected to ensure
its integrity before it is placed onto its designated location.
2.6.3.13
In addition to survey checking on the slope
profile after completion of deposition works, visual inspections shall also be
carried out regularly on the sloping seawall structure whenever possible from
the seaside. Diver inspections shall
also be carried out after the deposition work is completed and a final
inspection shall be carried out after the whole length of seawall is completed. If any significant holes or areas with
infilled interstices are identified, rectification works shall be promptly
carried out.
2.6.3.14
Bermstone is the key element that should be installed as soon as
practicable to its designated position in protecting the toe of the seawall
structure from being affected by scouring due to waves and currents. The early
deposition of bermstones would enhance the overall integrity and protect the
overall structure from environmental attack.
2.6.3.15
The bermstones will be installed with the aid of a derrick barge. They will be deposited underwater onto the
seabed carefully by grabs. Diver
inspection shall be carried out after installation to ensure that the
bermstones have been placed properly in accordance with the design requirements
and any gaps between bermstones are kept to a minimum.
8.
Placement of Concrete Blocks
2.6.3.16 Precast concrete blocks are to be
placed for vertical seawall in accordance with the designed sectional
configuration and corner details for each layer of blocks. Placement of concrete blocks is carried out
following the deposition of a layer of leveling stones to ensure the vertical
alignment of the seawall blocks. Diver
inspection will be undertaken to confirm the positions of leveling stones and
bottom layer(s) of concrete blocks.
Derrick barge with loading cables/wires is normally employed to
correctly position the seawall blockworks.
Regular survey checks will be undertaken to further review the horizontal
and vertical alignment.
9. Construction
of Coping
2.6.3.17
The last step in seawall construction is the casting of in-situ concrete
copings. This activity should be carried
out as late as possible to eliminate any additional settlement on the soil
stratum after being surcharged by the seawall structure and possible damage by
frequent loading/unloading of construction materials and heavy
machineries. It is recommended that the
seawall coping will only be cast at the end of the superstructure construction
rather than at the reclamation completion stage.
2.6.4
Site Formation
2.6.4.1
The site formation to be carried out mainly in Tung
Chung Valley (TCV-6 and TCV-7) along Tung Chung Road, Tung Chung West (TCW-2)
at the west of the town park and the proposed service reservoirs next to the
existing one. Surplus inert Construction & Demolition (C&D) material
generated in the site formation would be reused in the concurrent projects
especially for the reclamation filling works in Tung Chung East.
2.6.5
Road Works and Utilities
2.6.5.1
The proposed road
works and utilities include road networks, drainage systems, sewerage networks,
water supply networks and utility construction to support the development in
the new development area in TCE and TCW.
2.6.5.2
Except for the
construction of the viaduct of Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section), typical construction method at-grade road construction would be
adopted. The works involve earthworks, utilities laying, laying of sub-base
materials and laying of bituminous or concrete surfacing layers.
2.6.6
Viaduct of Road P1 (including Tai Ho Interchange)
2.6.6.1
The substructures of the viaduct at Road P1 (Tung
Chung – Tai Ho Section) including Tai Ho Interchange (THI) will take the form
of reinforced concrete (RC) columns & pile caps founded on RC bored piles.
It is envisaged that the superstructures of the Road P1 Viaduct, for accommodating
the dual-2 carriageway, will be constructed by one of the following methods:
2.6.6.2
Precast
segmental method: With the bridge deck constructed as precast
segments (each a few metres long) which are lifted into position and then
stitched & prestressed together. This method was adopted extensively for
numerous bridgework projects in Hong Kong in recent years (e.g. Shenzhen Bay
Bridge, Deep Bay Link, Route 8);
2.6.6.3
In-situ
balanced-cantilever method: With the bridge deck constructed as
in-situ segments by a travelling formwork (each segment was concreted in-situ
and then prestressed onto the preceding segment). This method was adopted in
some of the projects in Hong Kong (e.g. Castle Peak Road Improvement Siu Lam
Viaduct.
2.6.6.4
The above methods do not differ significantly in
terms of environmental impacts. The selection of method is, rather, driven by
consideration on engineering constraints and the individual contractors’
available equipment/resources in-hand. It should be noted that although the
precast segmental method does not require mega lifting equipment as that for
the precast spans method, the length of spans that the precast segmental method
can sustain is usually limited to about 80 m (due to limitation on the capacity
of the launching girder for such a method). For the purpose of this assessment,
it is appropriate to assume that the length of spans for precast segmental
method should be limited to 75 m.
2.6.7
Underpass at Road D1 in Tung Chung East
2.6.7.1
Cut-and-Cover method would be adopted for the
underpass at Road D1 in Tung Chung East, which involving trench-excavation
(i.e. open-cut) followed by in-situ construction of the tunnel structures.
2.6.8
Landscaping Works at Open Spaces, Amenity Areas and
Slopes
2.6.8.1
Landscaping works
at open space, amenity areas and slopes will be provided after site formation
works and slope works. As these will mainly involve planting and minor
pedestrian facilities, environmental impact is not anticipated.
2.6.9
Polder Scheme and Stormwater Attenuation and
Treatment Ponds in Tung Chung West
2.6.9.1
The polder scheme proposed in TCW as part of the
flood protection measures will be generally in form of an earth berm less than
approximate 1.5m in height while the stormwater attenuation and treatment ponds
will be in form of normal water pond with various depth and planting for
sedimentation and water treatment purpose. The works involve earthwork, laying
of lining and some water pipe laying works. Suitable landscaping works would
also be implemented for the polders and stormwater attenuation and treatment
ponds.
2.6.10
Rising Main connecting Siu Ho Wan Sewage Treatment
Works
2.6.10.1 Rising main
connecting Siu Ho Wan Sewage Treatment Works will be carried out after the
completion of the reclamation for Road P1. Cut-and-cover method would be
adopted as far as possible for the rising main, which involves
trench-excavation (i.e. open-cut) followed by in-situ construction of the
rising main. For those portion across the North Lantau Highway, trenchless
method such as pipe jacking will be adopted.
2.6.11
Salt Water and Fresh Water Service Reservoirs
2.6.11.1 The major construction works will include typical earthwork, concrete
works for service reservoir structures, pipeworks and modification work to
existing access road. Both cut-and-fill slopes shall be
formed for the formation of platform for the service reservoirs construction
and for the modification work to existing access road.
2.6.12
Proposed New Railway Stations in Tung Chung East
and Tung Chung West
2.6.12.1 Proposed railway
stations and its associated railway system in TCE and TCW will be conducted
under separate study subject to the implementation programme by the Government.
For the purpose of assessing the cumulative construction phase impacts, a
cut-&-cover methodology is assumed for the new station in TCW and at-grade
construction for the new station in TCE.
2.6.12.2 Tunnel
Boring Method (TBM) is proposed for the construction of part of the tunnel
since the current alignment is proposed to pass underneath the existing Man Wan
Chung bay area and also underneath the hill crests to the northeast of Ma Wan
Chung which has a height up to +50mPD. A minimum of 1.0d, where d is the tunnel
diameter, clearance has been allowed from the seabed level or ground level to
the top of the tunnel during the design of the vertical alignment of the
tunnel. The depth of the track level ranges from roughly -5mPD at the existing
Tung Chung Station to -18.25mPD at the proposed TCW station.
2.6.13
Buildings
2.6.13.1 As
discussed in Section 2.9, the first
batch of population intake will commence around Year 2023 and would last for 7 years progressively until Year 2030 for the last
batch. The building construction will therefore align with the population
intake programme. In TCE, Phase 1 Buildings will be mainly the western part of
the proposed development area on newly reclaimed in TCE, site TCV-6 and TCV-7
in Tung Chung Valley along Tung Chung Road and site TCW-2) in TCW at the west
of the town park. Apart from several educational sites (site DO-03, DO-04) in TCE,
operation of Phase 1 Building will also include a salt water pumping station, a
sewage pumping station and electricity substation. Phase 2 Building will be
mainly the north-western part of the proposed development area on newly
reclaimed in TCE (site D1-1, D1-2, D2-1, D2-2, D2-3 and D2-4) while Phase 3
Building will be located at the centre of the proposed development area in TCE
(site A1-1, A1-2, A2-1, A2-2, A2-3 and A2-4). The remaining development area in
TCE will be included in the last phase of the development for population
intake. In TCW, after the Phase 1 development along the Tung Chung Road, the
remaining areas will be developed gradually from the downstream of Tung Chung Stream
up to Shek Mun Kap area together with all the necessary supporting
infrastructure. Full population intake of all new development under this project
is expected to be by around 2030.
2.6.13.2 Construction activities would
include concrete foundation works, formworks and superstructures.
2.6.14
Others
2.6.14.1 The existing Pak Mong Pier, a solid jetty, will be affected by the
proposed reclamation works. Hence, re-provision of the facilities in a form of
landing steps along the waterfront promenade at the TCE will form as part of
the reclamation works.
2.7
Consideration
of Alternatives for Construction Methodologies
2.7.1
Alternative Methodology for Seawall Construction
2.7.1.1
As discussed in Section 1.2, approximately 120 ha of water at the north of the
existing Tung Chung new town is proposed to be reclaimed to form land for TCE
and 9 ha for Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section). Seawall with a length of
approximately 3,400m is hence required to support the proposed reclamation and
protect it against wave and current action. In general, seawall is a retaining
structure to protect the reclaimed fill. Therefore, the design of seawall
should achieve a minimum Factor of Safety to ensure the stability against the
slip failure and provide adequate bearing capacity to support the seawall
without significant settlement. In accordance with Clause 4.3 of Port Works
Design Manual (2002), Part 4, the global factor of safety against soil shear
failure along critical slip surface will be checked to ensure the stability of
the proposed seawall structure.
2.7.1.2
Considering
seawall is always founded on seabed comprised of marine sediment which is generally soft in
nature, various options of the seawall design have been adopted in Hong Kong or
overseas reclamation projects to achieve the necessary stability requirements
of the seawall. A discussion of these options is presented below.
Option 1 - Fully
Dredged Seawall
2.7.1.3
Fully dredged
seawall is widely adopted in Hong Kong for the past decades as the preferred
seawall scheme in reclamation projects. It involves removal of the marine sediment in existing seabed for
forming the seawall base so as to ensure the stability of the seawall and
minimize the settlement of the seawall. A fully dredged trench will be required
to form and fill by sandfill / rockfill or rockfill only, followed by laying of
seawall core then the armour layers on the sloping seawall surface as shown in the
typical section in Appendix 2.4. Technically feasibility of this method is
well-recognized in the long list of its track records in past reclamation
projects in Hong Kong including West Kowloon Reclamation, Penny Bay’s
Reclamation, Chek Lap Kok Reclamation for new airport etc and its construction
works is generally familiar with local marine works contractor.
2.7.1.4
The adoption of
fully dredged seawall will involve large amount of dredging for the formation
of dredged trench which will lead to significant impact to the water quality
especially while the proposed reclamation is in close proximity to Tai Ho Inlet
and Tung Chung Bay where is well known ecological resources. In addition, a
large amount of sand / rock fill materials to be used to backfill the dredged
trench for the foundation of the seawall will also contribute some adverse
impact to the water quality. In view of the lack of the mud pits in Hong Kong,
necessary disposal of the dredged marine sediment is another key concern of the adoption of the
fully dredged option and may impose constraint to the use of the fully dredged
option, especially if some of the underlying marine sediment is contaminated.
2.7.1.5
Furthermore, in
order to transport the dredged marine sediment to designated location for disposal and bring
sufficient amount of the sand/rock fill materials to backfill the dredged
trench, it may require marine barges which will lead to possible increase of
the marine traffic issues. The noise and emission from this marine vessels will
also contribute to the noise impact and air pollution impact of the adjacent
areas and marine ecology.
Option 2 - Partial
Dredged Seawall
2.7.1.6
Partial dredged
seawall is similar to Option 1: Fully dredged seawall although not all the soft
marine sediment underneath seawall will be removed and replaced by sand/rock fill to
form the foundation of seawall. The marine sediment will only be removed to an certain extent such
that sufficient level of the stability of the seawall can be achieved. Compared
to Option 1, the amount of dredged marine sediment to be disposal and fill materials to be required
for filling up of the dredged trench can be reduced to certain extent. However,
those concerns similar to fully dredged seawall including need of the disposal
site for dredged materials, water quality impact due to dredging, need of large
amount of filling materials for dredged trench and induced marine traffic can only
be relieved to certain extent but still cannot be eliminated.
Option 3 -
Non-dredged Seawall with Ground Improvement
Option 3a -
Non-dredged Seawall with Band Drains and Surcharge
2.7.1.7
The method of band
drains and surcharge has good performance and track records in Hong Kong on the
control of long term residual settlement. Apart from settlement control, the
design of seawall should achieve a minimum factor of safety to ensure stability
against slip failure as required in Clause 4.3 of Port Works Design Manual,
Part 4. The stability of seawall mainly
depends upon the shear strength capacity of the underlying soil stratum
including marine sediment and alluvium.
In TCE, the marine sediment is generally soft in nature with thickness
from about 9m to 15m.
2.7.1.8
Although the
method of band drains and surcharge could accelerate the consolidation
settlement, improvement to the shear strength capacity of marine sediment is
indispensable. Improvement of the shear
strength of marine sediment by this method is relatively less effective
compared to other ground improvement methods such as stone column and deep
cement mixing etc, and is highly depending localised ground condition and its
performance need to be carefully verified by considerable amount of in-situ
monitoring and field testing. If necessary, a very long surcharge period will
be required to ensure sufficient degree of consolidation as well as gain in
shear strength is achieved which will always lead to high uncertainty to the
stability and the construction programme.
2.7.1.9
Based on the current
assessment of seawall stability for the non-dredged method where the soft
marine sediment is left in-place, the use of band drains and surcharge (with
nominal surcharge height and a reasonable surcharging period of around 6 to 8
months) fail to achieve the required seawall stability against slip failure.
Therefore, the use of band drains and surcharge is considered inadequate to be
used for the non-dredged method of seawalls.
Option 3b -
Non-dredged Seawall with Stone Columns
2.7.1.10
Stone Columns are
typically used in soft soil applications to facilitate consolidation of the
compressible soils for the drained reclamation and increase the shear strength
of the soil when dealing with stability issues associated with the seawall and
breakwater structures. It is achieved by the use of vibro-displacement or
vibro-replacement method. These techniques involve the installation of gravel
compacted piles commonly referred to as “stone columns” into the soil
compressible soils.
2.7.1.11
Stone columns are
achieved by the use of the vibro-displacement/vibro-replacement method –
vibro-flotation under either land-based or marine based operation. The
penetration of the vibro-flot in soils produces a cavity that is subsequently
filled with gravel, either feed from the top of the hole or using a bottom feed
system. The compaction of loose soils or uncompacted fills can be achieved at
depth by using the process of vibro-flotation. The vibro-flot is then
reintroduced into the gravel and the procedure repeated until adequate stone
compaction and column size has been achieved. Each vibro-compaction phase is
carried out in 300 to 500 mm steps, proceeding from the bottom to the top so as
to create a "stone column" with load bearing properties and vertical
drainage effects. No spoil is generally required to be disposed for the use of
stone column method but a considerable amount of the gravel is required which
is generally required to be inputted from Mainland China. The application of
stone columns is not extensive as band drains and surcharge system in Hong Kong
and its cost is relatively expensive.
2.7.1.12
In recent HKBCF
reclamation project, stone column has been largely adopted in different types
of non-dredged seawalls for the proposed around 140 hectares reclamation. It
has been solely adopted in some portions of the seawall to improve the
underneath soft marine sediment to form a firm foundation for the seawall while in
some other portion stone column and steel cellular structure are jointly
applied as another type of non-dredged seawall system.
2.7.1.13
Stone column as
ground treatment for non-dredged seawall design is adopted in HKBCF reclamation
project. It is also identified that solely use of stone column to support the
seawall will generally require a large amount of the stone column especially
while the thickness of marine sediment is large and the water is deep. It may sometimes lead
to constraint on provision of the large amount of plant, supply of gravel and
marine traffic. Combination of stone column and other non-dredged seawall
method such as pipe-pile and steel cellular structure can help to relieve the
over dependence of single component of works which is always considered to be
inappropriate for large scale project.
2.7.1.14
In view of the
above, the use of the non-dredged seawall with stone column is still considered
to be one of the feasible option for the proposed TCE and Road P1 (Tung Chung –
Tai Ho Section) reclamation especially for those portion with relative shallow
water and thinner marine sediment . The schematic cross section is shown in Appendix 2.4.
Option 4 -
Pipe-pile wall
2.7.1.15
Apart from the
ground improvement methods discussed above, pipe pile wall is considered to be
the alternative option to support the proposed seawall structures without
dredging the marine sediment. The
seawall will be supported by a row of contiguous pipe pile wall in connection with
another row of contiguous pipe pile as shown in Appendix 2.4. All the pipe piles will be penetrated through the
whole depth of marine sediment and soft alluvial clay and founded on either
stiff alluvium or weathered rock stratum. In order to provide sufficient
structural capacity under the aggressive sea condition over the whole design
life, the pipe pile would be filled with structural concrete with reinforcement
cage from top of the pile down to approximately 5m below seabed.
2.7.1.16
The pipe pile wall
is not uncommon in the marine structures.
However, measures should be provided to prevent loss of fine materials
from reclamation through the contiguous pipe piles. These include the tight control on the
construction tolerance of the piles, use of anchor system between consecutive
pipes behind the piles. In addition, the installation of pipe piles is through
the vibratory/press-in method.
2.7.1.17 One of the
concerns for adopting pipe pile wall is that the pile pipes are visually
intrusive. This problem can be resolved by lowering the crest level of the pipe
pipes. The level should be designed to be just above high water level such that
the capping of the structure can be installed in dry environment. A sloping
berm topped with rock armours can also be proposed in front of the structure,
except for sections where vertical seawalls are required for berthing. The rock armours on the sloping berm would be
designed against wave action in the same way as a sloping seawall, and at the
same time provide substrates for fish spawning ground, coral growth, etc as in
traditional seawall. The area within the pipe pile structure and that below the
sloping berm can be coupled with other ground improvement measures where
necessary. A layer of rock armours or artificial units could be placed for the
topping of the completed pipe pile structure.
2.7.1.18
When compared to
other ground improvement methods, relatively high cost and long construction
period are expected for the construction and associated testing of the
piles. The implications to the overall
cost and programme may cause this option less favourable than other ground
improvement methods. In addition, the
maintenance of pipe pile wall against corrosion under the aggressive sea
condition is an important issue that need to be addressed. However, there is an option that the
pipe-pile method is jointly adopted with the other ground treatment method.
With this arrangement, the concerns on the necessary large amount of plant and
gravel for stone column (as mentioned in previous section) and relatively high
construction cost for pipe pile wall can be relieved. In view of the above, the
combined use of stone column and pipe pile wall is considered as one of the
feasible option for the proposed TCE reclamation.
Option 5 - Steel
Cellular Structure
2.7.1.19 Steel
Cellular Structure can be proposed as non-dredged seawall. The steel cellular
structure consists of large diameter circular cells of about 30m diameter
formed by interlocking of a large number of approximately 500mm wide steel
sheet piles. The cells are then linked
together by arc sections to form a continuous seawall structure. The cellular structure, once driven into
alluvium layer and backfilled up its top level, will become a massive gravity
retaining structure which can retain the reclamation fill. The schematic
cross-sections and isometric view are shown in Appendix 2.4 respectively.
2.7.1.20 Though this
non-dredged seawall scheme is only firstly adopted in HKBCF reclamation and has
not been widely adopted in Hong Kong, they are widely used for maritime
structures in South Korea, Japan, Singapore, Greece, Denmark, Chile, France,
Canada, US, etc. Steel sheet pile cellular structures have also been adopted
for port developments in India, Indonesia and Egypt. In particular, this seawall scheme has been
adopted for land reclamation in Jurong Island, Singapore where the average
seawater temperature is at times similar to and at other time higher than that
in Hong Kong waters.
2.7.1.21 Similar to
pipe pile wall scheme, one of the concerns for adopting steel cellular
structure is that the steel sheet piles are visually intrusive. This problem
can be resolved by lowering the crest level of the steel cellular structure.
The level should be designed to be just above high water level such that the
capping of the cellular structure can be installed in dry environment. A
sloping berm topped with rock armours can also be proposed in front of the
structure, except for sections where vertical seawalls are required for
berthing. The rock armours on the
sloping berm would be designed against wave action in the same way as a sloping
seawall, and at the same time provide substrates for fish spawning ground,
coral growth, etc as in traditional seawall. The area within the steel cellular
structure and that below the sloping berm can be coupled with other ground
improvement measures where necessary. A layer of rock armours or artificial
units could be placed for the topping of the completed cells.
2.7.1.22 With the
provision of a sloping berm in front of the seawall cells and due consideration
of a gain in shear strength of the marine sediment during consolidation process with adoption of
some ground treatment method such as stone column, the steel sheet pile
cellular structures can be designed to be omitted in the long run based on
seawall stability assessment. In this
regard, the long-term corrosion protection measures for the steel sheet pile
cells could be omitted as well.
2.7.1.23 Based on
the experience from HKBCF, the adoption of the steel cellular structure will
generally require relatively higher level of construction technology, marine
vessels with very large lifting capacity, considerable size of on-site and
off-site pre-fabrication yard and larger working space but it has its advantage
of relative large stiffness to cope with the situation with great water depth
and thick soft marine sediment underneath so as to provide a more robust
seawall design.
2.7.1.24 In the area
of proposed TCE reclamation, the water level is not as deep as HKBCF while the
marine sediment is generally thinner than HKBCF. In
addition, available working space is relative tight along the existing
seafront. The use of the steel cellular is limited and less effective in view
of the above and hence not considered.
Recommendations of
Construction Methodology for Seawall
2.7.1.25 The above
sections have described a total of 5 options for the construction for seawall.
The following table summarises the benefits and dis-benefits identified.
Table 2.27 Comparison of seawall design options
|
Options |
Benefits |
Dis-benefits |
|
Option 1 – Fully Dredged Seawall |
· Well proven
technology in Hong Kong. · Relatively fast
if dumping site for marine sediment is available and fill source is
sufficient. · Familiar by most
of the local contractors. · Better control of
the stability and settlement as all the compressible soft sediment underneath
the seawall are removed. |
· Large amount of
dredged marine sediment (up to approximate 4.4Mm3 (in-situ volume)) to be
disposed. · Large amount of
the fill materials (up to 4.4Mm3 (in-situ volume)) to be required to fill the
dredged trench as the foundation to support the seawall on top. · Increase of the
marine vessels trips (up to around 8,800 trips assuming 1,000m3 vessels) for
the transportation of the relatively large amount of dredged marine sediment
and fill materials. · Increased marine
vessels trips will lead to increased impact to noise and air. · Increased marine
vessels trips will lead to increased disturbance to the China White Dolphin. · It is currently
lack of dumping site for marine sediment in Hong Kong, the necessity disposal
of up to 4.4Mm3 marine sediment will impose a large pressure to the remaining
capacity of existing mud disposal grounds in Hong Kong. · Dredging of the
marine sediment will inevitably induce impact to the water quality to certain
extent. · In general, less
environmentally friendly. |
|
Option 2 - Partial Dredged Seawall |
· Well proven
technology in Hong Kong. · Relatively fast
if dumping site for marine sediment is available and fill source is
sufficient. · Familiar by most
of the local contractors. · Relative less
marine sediment to be disposal compared to fully dredged seawall. · Relative less
fill materials to be required compared to fully dredged seawall. |
· Even though less
than fully dredged seawall, relative large amount of dredged marine sediment
(up to approximate more than 2.0Mm3 (in-situ volume)) is still required to be
disposed. · Even though less
than fully dredged seawall, large amount of the fill materials (up tomore
than approximate 2.0Mm3 (in-situ volume)) is still required to fill the
dredged trench as the foundation to support the seawall on top. · Even though less
than fully dredged seawall, increase of the marine vessels trips (up to
around 4,000 trips assuming 1,000m3 vessels) for the transportation of the
relatively large amount of dredged marine sediment and fill materials. · Even though less
than fully dredged seawall, increased marine vessels trips will lead to
increased impact to noise and air. · Even though less
than fully dredged seawall, increased marine vessels trips will lead to
increased disturbance to the China White Dolphin. · It is currently
lack of dumping site for marine sediment in Hong Kong, the necessity disposal
of up to 3.7Mm3 marine sediment will impose a large pressure to the remaining
capacity of existing mud pits in Hong Kong. · Dredging of the
marine sediment will inevitably induce impact to the water quality to certain
extent. · Relative higher
risk of settlement and instability compared to fully dredged seawall. |
|
Option 3 – Non-dredged Seawall with Ground Improvement |
· Minimal or even
no marine sediment are required to be disposed. · Significantly
reduced demand of fill materials for filling of the dredged trench compared
to fully dredged / partial dredged seawall. · Significantly
reduced marine vessels trips are required for transportation of dredged
marine sediment and fill materials compared to fully / partial dredged
seawall. · In general, more
environmentally friendly. |
· Less familiar by
local contractors. · Relative longer
construction period (if band drain and surcharge method is adopted) may be
required compared to fully dredged seawall. · Some ground
improvement technique (such as band drain and surcharge) may not be
applicable for seawall from the technical consideration. · Relative longer
mobilisation time from overseas may be required for some of ground
improvement techniques. · Relative higher
cost compared to fully dredged / partial dredged seawall. |
|
Option 4 – Pipe-pile wall |
· Minimal or even
no marine sediment are required to be disposed. · Significantly
reduced demand of fill materials for filling of the dredged trench compared
to fully dredged / partial dredged seawall. · Significantly
reduced marine vessels trips are required for transportation of dredged
marine sediment and fill materials compared to fully / partial dredged
seawall. · Relatively lower
requirements of construction technology compared to Option 5 including marine
vessels with very large lifting capacity, considerable size of on-site and
off-site pre-fabrication yard and larger working space…etc. · Jointly use of
pipe-pile wall with Option 3 - ground improvement method (stone column) to
relieve over dependence of single component of works which is considered
inappropriate for large scale project. · In general, more
environmentally friendly. |
· Less familiar by
local contractor. · Relative longer
construction period may be required compared to fully dredged seawall. · Some ground
treatment (despite much less than those required for Option 3) will still be
required to strengthen the ground to support the pipe-pile wall. · Measures should
be provided to prevent loss of fine materials from reclamation through the
contiguous pipe piles. · Relative higher
cost compared to fully dredged / partial dredged seawall. · Maintenance of
pipe pile wall against corrosion under aggressive sea condition via different
corrosion protection measures is one of the concern. |
|
Option 5 – Steel Cellular Structure |
· Minimal or even
no marine sediment are required to be disposed. · Significantly
reduced demand of fill materials for filling of the dredged trench compared
to fully dredged / partial dredged seawall. · Significantly
reduced marine vessels trips are required for transportation of dredged
marine sediment and fill materials compared to fully / partial dredged
seawall. · Long term
corrosion protection measures for steel sheet pile cells (as required by
Option 3 – Pipe pile wall scheme) could be omitted if a sloping berm in front
of the seawall cells is provided. · Relative larger
stiffness to cope with the situation with great water depth and soft marine
sediment. · Jointly use of
steel cellular structure with Option 3 - ground improvement method (stone
column) to relieve over dependence of single component of works which is
considered inappropriate for large scale project. · In general, more
environmentally friendly. |
· Less familiar by
local contractor. · Require
relatively higher level of construction technology, marine vessels with very
large lifting capacity. · Relative longer
construction period may be required compared to fully dredged seawall. · Some ground
treatment (despite much less than those required for Option 3) will still be
required to strengthen the ground to support the steel cellular structure. · Relative higher
cost compared to fully dredged / partial dredged seawall. · Relative larger
working space is required for construction works. · Considerable size
of on-site and off-site pre-fabrication yards are required. |
2.7.1.26 It can
therefore be seen that Option 3 (ground improvement by stone column) or
combined use of Option 3 and Option 4 (pipe-pile wall) have the biggest environmental benefits in terms of
minimisation of the dredging, reduced amount of marine sediment to be disposed, reduced amount of required fill materials and reduction
of the marine vessels movement with their correlated air and noise impact. On
this basis, Option 3 or combined use of Option 3 and Option 4 have been
selected as the preferred option for implementation.
2.7.2
Alternative Construction Methodology for
Reclamation
2.7.2.1
As discussed in Section 1.1, apart from the approximately 3,400m seawall, the main
reclamation above high water mark of 120.5ha of land for TCE and 8.6ha of land
for Road P1 Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) is another key component of the land
formation for the proposed new town extension in TCE. In general, the
reclamation methodology may be summarised as (1) Fully dredged, (2) Partially
dredged and (3) Non-dredged (Drained) reclamation.
Option 1 - Fully-dredged Reclamation
2.7.2.2
Under this form of reclamation, the layer of marine
sediment is fully dredged. Dredging will
be carried out down to a firm stratum, commonly the alluvial layer. Typical
arrangement is presented in Appendix 2.5 for reference. This serves to eliminate
post-reclamation settlement due to consolidation of soft marine sediment layer.
On some particular projects, surcharging is carried out even if fully-dredged
reclamation is adopted due to the presence of soft alluvial clay in the
underlying alluvial layer. The required
surcharge period is nonetheless much shorter than the case of non-dredged
reclamation.
2.7.2.3
After the dredging works, reclamation fill will
then be deposited onto the dredged seabed, using either sandfill, or public
fill, or a combination thereof. Priority will be given to consider the use of
public fill as it is the government policy to make beneficial use of public
fill generated by the construction industry as far as possible. However, it should be noted that reclamation
with sandfill is generally more expeditious than using public fill.
2.7.2.4
The fully dredged reclamation method could achieve
substantial programming advantage, not only because its surcharge period (if
any) will be much shorter than that in the case of non-dredged reclamation, but
also because reclamation filling could proceed more expeditiously.
2.7.2.5
The disadvantage of fully-dredged reclamation is
that the dredged marine sediment will need
to be disposed, thus consuming the space of mud-pits in Hong Kong which is
already tight or cross boundary. Furthermore, the volume of reclamation filing
in fully-dredged reclamation will be larger than the case of non-dredged
reclamation, thus involving higher construction cost for the reclamation and
increased marine traffic and adhere risk.
2.7.2.6
With the consideration of latest government policy
as stated in Environment, Transport and Works Bureau (ETWB) TCW No. 34/2002 of
keeping the marine sediment in place, the use of fully dredged method
will not be considered under this Project.
2.7.2.7
If fully dredged method is
adopted, it is estimated approximately 15.5Mm3 (in-situ) of marine sediment is required to be dredged and disposed. In
addition, similar of fill materials will be imported to fill the dredged trench
to form the foundation of the seawall.
Option 2 -
Partially-dredged Reclamation
2.7.2.8
Partially dredged reclamation method is similar to
those of fully-dredged method while not all the underlying soft marine sediment are to be removed. Typical arrangement is presented in Appendix 2.5 for reference. Partial removal of marine
or alluvial deposits, leaving the lower, stiffer or stronger deposits in place
reduces the dredging and fill quantities compared to the fully dredged method.
However, it should be noted that better control is required than for full
removal for the final trimming in dredging and for initial fill placement, to
avoid future differential settlement. The remaining layer of marine or alluvial
deposits will consolidate by vertical drainage upward through the fill and
downward, if the layer beneath the soil is sufficiently permeable. The
construction programme must still allow time for this consolidation and band
drains with preloading may still be required if the available time is short.
The extent of marine or alluvial deposits to be left in place must be decided
after investigation and is subject to detailed design. It will depend on the
amount of settlement predicted to occur after the completion of the reclamation
compared to the magnitude of differential settlement which can be tolerated in
the particular situation.
2.7.2.9
Similar to fully-dredged reclamation,
partially-dredged still leads to concern on the necessary disposal of marine
sediment, import of large amount of the fill materials for the dredged trench
and increased amount of marine traffic, although the concern is relatively less
than the fully-dredged method.
2.7.2.10 If partially dredged method is adopted, it is estimated approximately
8.0Mm3 (in-situ) of marine sediment is required to be dredged and disposed. In addition, similar of fill
materials will be imported to fill the dredged trench to form the foundation of
the seawall.
Option 3 -
Non-dredged (Drained) Reclamation
2.7.2.11 Instead of
dredging the marine sediment, drained (non-dredged) method is one of the
commonly adopted reclamation method in Hong Kong. The non-dredged reclamation
method will leave the marine sediment in place, but will add measures to
prevent the occurrence of mud wave, and adopt band drain and surcharge system
to accelerate consolidation of the marine sediment and alluvial clay so as to
mitigate the risk of post-reclamation settlement.
Band Drains and Surcharge
2.7.2.12 During
reclamation, the dissipation of excess pore water pressure in the soft
compressible soils during primary consolidation would take place with drainage
paths in the vertical direction which relates to the thickness of the marine
mud and soft alluvial clay. The consolidation period can be shortened
significantly by reducing the drainage path. This is achieved by the
installation of band drains through the highly compressible layers such as
marine mud/alluvial clay layer, at typically 1.2m spacing in triangular pattern
in plan. The presence of band drains provide additional shortened drainage path
in the horizontal direction for the pore water in the soil matrix. It enables
the pore water to drain horizontally to the conduits, and then vertically
through the conduits to the free drainage layer provided on top of the marine
sediment. In this way, the flow path is reduced considerably and hence the
consolidation process greatly accelerated.
2.7.2.13 The
consolidation process of marine sediment and soft
alluvial clay can be further accelerated by the use of surcharge (or
pre-loading). The objective of surcharging is to induce settlement greater than
that predicted under the service loading.
2.7.2.14 Band drains
can be installed by both marine and land method subject to site constraints,
type of fill materials, water depth and design. Normally, the marine-based
method always has programme advantage due to early start of the consolidation
in early stage of the reclamation filling. Band drain and surcharge method is a
proven technique in Hong Kong and a lot of previous site data are available to
demonstrate its performance to accelerate the consolidation settlement. Typical
arrangement is shown in Appendix 2.5 for reference.
Prevention of Mud Wave
2.7.2.15 As the soft
marine sediment is still in place (and have not been
treated) at the time of reclamation filling, mud wave is one of the key
concerns for non-dredged reclamation method and a series of methods have been
well developed in previous completed projects as listed below to prevent the
occurrence of mud wave during reclamation filling.
·
Tight connection must be ensured between geotextile
sheetings (usually by sewing or stapling for woven geotextile, and thermal
bonding for non-woven geotextile) to form geotextile panels up to the limit
that can be handled by marine craft. The overlapping between geotextile panels
must also be adequate (commonly specified as 1 to 2 metres).
·
Deposition of the sand blanket shall be carried out
in layers not exceeding 0.5m thick, with a leading edge between consecutive
layers. .
·
Deposition of the reclamation fill shall be carried
out in layers of limited thickness and with a leading edge between consecutive
layers. .
·
Close monitoring of the reclamation shall be
carried out, including regular underwater survey.
2.7.2.16 If non-dredged method is adopted for the reclamation, no or minimal
marine sediment is expected to be
dredged and disposal.
Recommendations of
Construction Methodology for Reclamation
2.7.2.17 Different
from fully-dredged or partially dredged method, no marine sediment is required
to be disposed for the non-dredged reclamation method and hence concern on the
limited availability of the mud pit for disposal can be eliminated. In
addition, the required large amount of fill material for the filling of the
dredged trench is no longer required for the non-dredged method. Both of them
can greatly reduce the marine traffic for the transportation of the dredged
marine sediment and fill materials which will have beneficial effect to the air
and noise impact (due to marine vessels movement) as well as the marine traffic
risk. Furthermore, band drain and surcharge is well-developed method in Hong
Kong as adopted in many previous reclamation projects and is generally with a
relative low cost compared to fully/partially dredged method. The following
table summarises the benefits and dis-benefits identified.
Table 2.28 Comparison of reclamation design options
|
Options |
Benefits |
Dis-benefits |
|
Option 1 – Fully Dredged Reclamation |
· Well proven
technology in Hong Kong. · Relatively fast
if dumping site for marine sediment is available and fill source is
sufficient. · Familiar by most
of the local contractors. · Better control of
the stability and settlement as all the compressible soft marine sediment
underneath the seawall are removed. |
· Large amount of
the fill materials (up to 15.5Mm3 (in-situ volume)) to be required to fill
the dredged trench as the foundation to support the seawall on top. · Increase of the
marine vessels trips (up to around 30,000 trips assuming 1,000m3 vessels) for
the transportation of the relatively large amount of dredged marine sediment
and fill materials. · Increased marine
vessels trips will lead to increased impact to noise and air. · Increased marine
vessels trips will lead to increased disturbance to the China White Dolphin. · It is currently
lack of dumping site for marine sediment in Hong Kong, the necessity disposal
of up to 15.5Mm3 marine sediment will impose a large pressure to the
remaining capacity of existing mud disposal grounds in Hong Kong. · Dredging of the
marine sediment will inevitably induce impact to the water quality to certain
extent. · Sand is generally
adopted for the backfilling of the dredged trench. There is constraints or
difficulty nowadays to import large amount of sand from Mainland China under
the current policy. · In general, less
environmentally friendly. |
|
Option 2 – Partially-dredged Reclamation |
· Well proven
technology in Hong Kong. · Relatively fast
if dumping site for marine sediment is available and fill source is
sufficient. · Familiar by most
of the local contractors. · Relative less
marine sediment to be disposal compared to fully dredged reclamation. · Relative less
fill materials to be required compared to fully dredged reclamation. |
· Even though less
than fully dredged reclamation, relative large amount of dredged marine
sediment (up to approximate more than 8.0Mm3 (in-situ volume)) is still
required to be disposed. · Even though less
than fully dredged reclamation, large amount of the fill materials (up to
more than approximate 8.0Mm3 (in-situ volume)) is still required to fill the
dredged trench as the foundation to support the reclamation on top. · Even though less
than fully dredged seawall, increase of the marine vessels trips (up to
around 16,000 trips assuming 1,000m3 vessels) for the transportation of the
relatively large amount of dredged marine sediment and fill materials. · Even though less
than fully dredged reclamation, increased marine vessels trips will lead to
increased impact to noise and air. · Even though less
than fully dredged reclamation, increased marine vessels trips will lead to
increased disturbance to the China White Dolphin. · It is currently
lack of dumping site for marine sediment in Hong Kong, the necessity disposal
of up to 8.0Mm3 marine sediment will impose a large pressure to the remaining
capacity of existing mud pits in Hong Kong. · Dredging of the
marine sediment will inevitably induce impact to the water quality to certain
extent. · Relative higher
risk of settlement and instability compared to fully dredged reclamation. |
|
Option 3 – Non-dredged (Drained) Reclamation |
· No marine
sediment are required to be disposed. · Well proven
technology adopted in many reclamation projects in recent years. · Significantly
reduced demand of fill materials for filling of the dredged trench compared
to fully dredged / partial dredged reclamation. · Significantly
reduced marine vessels trips are required for transportation of dredged
marine sediment and fill materials compared to fully / partial dredged
reclamation. · In general, more
environmentally friendly |
· Considerable
amount of instrumentation should be installed to monitor the trend of
settlement during surcharging period to ensure the residual settlement
criteria is met. · Relative longer
construction period may be required for surcharging compared to fully dredged
method (if disposal site for marine sediment and fill source is sufficient). · Extension of the
surcharging period may be required during construction phase if the
settlement performance is out of the expectation which will eventually lead
to extension of the overall programme. Considerable amount of the ground
investigation and laboratory testing will be required during detailed design
stage to provide sufficient data for better estimation of settlement
behaviour. |
2.7.2.18 It can
therefore be seen that Option 3 has the biggest environmental benefits in terms
of no dredging of marine sediment, reduced
amount of fill materials, reduction of marine vessel trips for transportation
with correlated air and noise impact, on this basis, Option 3 has been selected
as the preferred option for implementation.
2.7.2.19 In view of
the above, the use of the non-dredged reclamation with band drain and surcharge
is preferable than other reclamation methods taking account of the cost and
most importantly environmental concerns. Therefore, non-dredged reclamation
with band drain and surcharge is assumed to be adopted in the proposed
reclamation in Tung Chung East.
2.7.3
Alternative Construction Methodologies for Road P1
(Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section)
2.7.3.1 As discussed in Section 1.1, the Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) will serve as a primary distributor parallel to the NLH and connects the districts of Tung Chung, Siu Ho Wan and Sunny Bay. Its configuration, routing and interchange arrangement are hence strategically related to the planning of the whole North Lantau.
2.7.3.2 As identified by the traffic analysis in the Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) report, the Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) connecting existing Ying Hei Road to the proposed THI will be a major external highway connection for TCE. The Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) has the below key functions:
·
To relieve the future traffic over-capacity of Tung
Chung East Interchange;
·
To divert the air and noise impact of through
traffic away from the existing Tung Chung town centre;
·
To serve as an alternative access to TCE in case of
traffic accidents in Tung Chung East Interchange and Yi Tung Road.
2.7.3.3
Two
possible structural options have been conducted for the Road P1 (Tung
Chung – Tai Ho Section), including
viaduct option (Option 1) and the reclamation option (Option 2) which are shown
in Appendix
2.5. The typical
cross sections are shown in Appendix
2.5. Key summaries
of these 2 options are listed as below.
Construction Option 1 – Viaduct Option
·
Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) is
constructed in the form of elevated viaduct adjacent to the existing seawall.
·
The soffit of the structure needs to be higher than
the wave crest and hence the road level is at about +8.0mPD.
·
The viaduct is aligned to avoid conflict with the
TM-CLKL piers and to minimise impact to the existing seawall armour rock.
·
The length of the viaduct structure is
approximately 1,200m and might not be cost-effective for setting up a precast
segment yard. In-situ balanced
cantilever by form traveller can be one of the possible construction
methods. Since the water depth is
shallow in the area, temporary deck might be required in this option for the
construction of the bridge foundation.
·
The viaduct is outside the “built up” area
stipulated in the ETWB TC 02/2013 Greening on Footbridges and Flyovers and
therefore is not covered by the circular.
Greening planter is not recommended on the viaduct due to the
maintenance difficulties of planters on primary distributor viaduct.
·
As stipulated in the Highways Department (HyD) Structures
Design Manual (SDM), utility is not usually allowed on viaduct structure. As such the Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section)
will not serve as a trunk utility corridor in this option.
·
In this viaduct option, the view from / to the
shoreline is unavoidably blocked by the viaduct structure. The region-wide
cycle track along Northern Lantau can be modified from the existing seawall
maintenance access track. Technically, a
long cycle and footbridge can be
constructed along the northern
·
The viaduct foundation is close to the ecological
sensitive area of Tai Ho Wan and hence water pollution control measures are
required during construction.
·
The long-term maintenance cost for viaduct is
generally higher than the at-grade road.
Construction Option 2 – Reclamation
Option
·
In the reclamation option (Option 2), the Road P1 (Tung
Chung – Tai Ho Section) is constructed on a strip of newly reclaimed land
north of MTR rail line at Tai Ho.
·
The formation level is at about +6.0mPD above the
wave crest level and tie-in with the adjacent ground.
·
The at-grade carriageway is aligned to avoid
conflict with the TM-CLKL piers.
·
ETWB TC 02/2012 Allocation of Space for Quality
Greening on Roads is followed. In the
technical circular, a 2.5m wide amenity strip, excluding profile barrier, at
the central reserve is required. Adding
space for profile barrier, the total width is 3.3m. On roadside, HKPSG and TPDM recommend 3m wide
for large tree planting on major roads.
·
In this option, an at-grade promenade and
region-wide cycle track can be constructed along the shoreline of the newly
reclaimed land, offering higher leisure value.
A 6m promenade and 4m standard 2-way cycle track are assumed. This promenade has a potential to link up the
promenade in Tung Chung East Development in the west to form a region-wide
promenade along North Lantau. Screening
might be considered at the amenity to screen off air and noise impact from Road
P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) to the promenade.
·
If necessary, the at-grade Road P1 (Tung
Chung – Tai Ho Section) and the footpath/ trail might in the future serve
as utility corridor for trunk utility.
·
The total width of the Road P1 (Tung Chung –
Tai Ho Section) corridor is approximately 40m and a significant width is for greening
following the guidance and for promenade.
·
The reclamation is close to the ecological
sensitive area of Tai Ho Wan and hence water pollution control measures are
required during construction. Elevated deck structure is proposed across the
important Tai Ho outlet. The other box culvert connecting Tai Ho Wan to Tung
Chung Bay needs to be extended.
·
The long-term maintenance cost for at-grade road is
generally lower than the viaduct.
Recommendations for Construction
Methodology for Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section)
2.7.3.4
To
conclude, both options are technically feasible in term of engineering.
However, as the reclamation option (Option 2) is recommended as it
offers a continuous promenade and shoreline to the public which suits the
planning of the North Lantau, and the visual impact of the reclamation option
is also relatively lower. The
pros and cons are summarised in the Table
2.29.
Table
2.29 Comparison
of Viaduct and Reclamation Options (Options 1 & 2) for Road P1 (Tung Chung
– Tai Ho Section)
|
Criteria |
Option 1 – Viaduct |
Option 2 - Reclamation |
|
Planning & Land Use |
· Shoreline
is blocked by elevated viaduct. |
· Continuous
promenade on North Lantau offers high leisure value. |
|
Traffic |
· Same |
· Same |
|
Environment |
· Less
disturbance to seabed · High
visual impact |
· More
disturbance to seabed · Lower
visual impact |
|
Impact to Locals |
· Unattractive
elevated structure |
· Offer
more regional open space |
|
Engineering |
· Feasible |
· Feasible. · Negative
skin friction allowed in TM-CLKL piers. |
|
Programme |
· Similar |
· Similar |
|
Cost |
· Higher
maintenance cost for structure |
· Lower
maintenance cost for at-grade roadwork |
2.7.3.5 The Road P1 is not only serving the TCE but its connectivity is closely related to other development on Northern Lantau, in particular the nearby Siu Ho Wan Development. During the course of the Study, it is understood that the Siu Ho Wan Development is still under review and the land use type and development parameters are not yet available. There are high uncertainties on the development scale as well as its traffic infrastructure. Several options of connecting TCE to THI (Options A to F) are explored and shown in Appendix 2.6. The pros and cons among these options are listed below and are summarised in the Table 2.30.
Connectivity Option
A
·
Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) is designed
to suit mainly the needs arisen from TCE. The Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai
Ho Section) from Tung Chung East side is connected directly to THI. A structural
provision is reserved for future extension of the Road P1 to the Siu Ho Wan
direction.
·
The scheme has the advantage of no junction
in-between Tung Chung East and Tai Ho Interchange. This offers the highest
traffic speed in-between Tung Chung East and the Tai Ho Interchange and hence
is more convenient to the Tung Chung East road users. The THI is mainly constructed to serve Tung
Chung area in this scheme.
·
The key drawback of this option is that there is no
interchange with the Siu Ho Wan development.
The potential traffic from Siu Ho Wan side cannot enter the Tai Ho
Interchange. This arrangement limits the external connectivity of the potential
Siu Ho Wan development and can in term limits the development potential of the
Siu Ho Wan development.
·
Due to the restraint to the future external
connectivity of Siu Ho Wan development, this option is not pursed.
·
The option serves as a fallback option if it is
confirmed in the future that there will be no development in Siu Ho Wan and no
interchange between Siu Ho Wan side and Tai Ho Interchange is required.
Connectivity Option B
·
Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) is designed
with an aim to serve both the TCE and the Siu Ho Wan Development. A
large-capacity grade separated roundabout interchange was proposed at the Siu
Ho Wan reclamation area. The interchange collects / distributes all the local
traffic from Tung Chung and Siu Ho Wan and then joins together to the THI for
expressway access. The relatively long separation between THI and the at-grade
roundabout not only provides the gradient for the level difference, but also
provides length for traffic to weave to the appropriate entry lanes.
·
The advantage of the option is that the design
provides a high traffic reservation for future development in Siu Ho Wan. The
scheme has a higher traffic capacity comparing to the other schemes.
·
The at-grade interchange collects / distributes all
the local traffic from Tung Chung and Siu Ho Wan and hence can reduce the
overall junction number along Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section).
·
The disadvantage is that the scheme involves
extensive reclamation and cannot be justified under the TCE alone. In fact the
scope is outside the EIA Study Boundary of the Tung Chung Remaining Development
project. It is difficult to be implemented under the EIA and funding process of
Tung Chung Remaining Development alone.
·
The implementation and programme of this highway
scheme is therefore tied in with the Siu Ho Wan development. Since there is still high uncertainty on the
feasibility and programme of Siu Ho Wan development, there is higher risk on
the implementation programme of this scheme.
·
The scheme requires land in the Siu Ho Wan
development planning boundary. This can
be a constraint for the land use in the Siu Ho Wan planning.
·
Although the initial reclamation area of this
scheme seems large, the reclamation is in fact within the Siu Ho Wan planning
area. This option can reduce the extra
reclamation directly north of Tai Ho Wan as in Options D to F.
·
Since this option will affect the planning of the
Siu Ho Wan development, the option is not pursed.
Connectivity Option C
·
Road P1 is designed with traffic connectivity
in-between Options A & B. An elevated diamond interchange is proposed north
of the THI to collect / distribute all the local traffic from both Tung Chung
and Siu Ho Wan. The option provides the
connectivity of THI to both directions of Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho
Section).
·
The diamond interchange with traffic signal is one
of the possible junction arrangements. A variation is to adopt an elevated
roundabout forming a double roundabout with the Tai Ho Interchange. The junction spacing is similar the above 2
variations and the pros and cons are similar.
·
The key advantage of this option is that the land
requirement footprint is the smallest among all the options. The disturbance to the seabed, the visual
impact and the cost is therefore the lowest among all the options.
·
The interchange can be partly within the scope of
Tung Chung Remaining Development and partly within the Siu Ho Wan Development.
Structural provision can be allowed on the elevated interchange for future
ramps to the Siu Ho Wan side.
·
However, a major disadvantage is that the elevated
diamond interchange and THI has relatively small junction separation at about
120m. (Transport Planning and Design Manual (TPDM) recommends 300m junction
separation for primary distributor level.)
The close junction separation can highly reduce the traffic capacity of
the junction groups and hence reduce the development scale that the interchange
can support. Especially since the
connection is between the primary distributor and an expressway, the relatively
short junction spacing might not be preferable for new interchange design.
·
Given the potential adverse impact to the traffic
performance due to relatively short junction spacing, this option is nor
preferable in traffic planning.
Connectivity Option D
·
This option explores the “mirroring” of Option B to
the Tung Chung side to offer a longer junction spacing whilst avoiding the
planning impact to Siu Ho Wan development.
·
In this scheme, the at-grade roundabout collects /
distributes all the local traffic from Tung Chung and Siu Ho Wan and then joins
together through a connecting viaduct.
No grade separation for Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) bypassing
the junction is provided.
·
The location of the at-grade roundabout is
carefully selected to have a balance between junction spacing / ramp gradient
and the reclamation limit. If the roundabout is put further west, the
reclamation extent will be enlarged. If
the roundabout is put further east, it will not provide sufficient junction
separation / length for climbing up to the Tai Ho Interchange.
·
The geometry of the connecting viaduct between the
at-grade roundabout and the Tai Ho Interchange is restrained by the desirable
minimum radius of curvature and the entry arm deflection at the at-grade
roundabout. Due to these constraints,
there is a land in-between the roadwork available for future use if
desirable. The local road access to the
site can be provided from the Siu Ho Wan side beneath the connecting viaduct.
·
The scheme is within the study boundary of Tung
Chung and allows future connectivity between Siu Ho Wan and Tai Ho Interchange.
·
Compared to Options E & F, the scope of work is
less in this scheme and hence has relatively low cost and visual impact.
·
The major problem in this arrangement is that the
through traffic along Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) will also
enter the at-grade roundabout. The lack of grade separation increases the
traffic burden to the at-grade roundabout. It is assessed that the capacity of
the at-grade roundabout is marginal in this scheme and has small reserved
traffic capacity in response to any increase in development.
·
Given the marginal insufficient traffic
performance, Options E & F with grade separations are further explored.
Connectivity Option E
·
This option has similar connection arrangement to
Option D, but a grade separation is provided along Road P1 (Tung Chung –
Tai Ho Section).
·
The grade separation significantly enhances the
traffic performance of the roundabout and hence resolves the traffic problem in
Option D.
·
In this scheme, the roundabout is elevated whereas
the Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) through traffic is at-grade. This
arrangement has two benefits in term of traffic. Firstly, a speed limit of
80kph can be maintained along Road P1 for through traffic offering faster
running speed. Secondly, the gradient of
the ramps connecting to the roundabout will assist the acceleration and
deceleration of the traffic entering and existing from Road P1 (Tung
Chung – Tai Ho Section) and hence improves the traffic safety.
·
Underpass is not considered as it will be in
conflict with the box culvert extension from Tai Ho Wan. The road levels of
TM-CLKL viaducts are at +30mPD and hence provides sufficient headroom for
3-level of road. The pier of the ramp
should be arranged such that the piling work would not be obstructed by the
TM-CLKL viaducts abovehead.
·
The drawback is that the scheme is presuming that
there will be a future extension of Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho
Section) to the Siu Ho Wan direction (no matter it is connecting to development
or as a bypass). Since the roundabout is in elevated structure, it is more
costly and less flexible for future design modification in case there is
significant planning assumption change.
·
Comparing all the options, Option E is among the
options which have the best traffic performance. It provides a reasonable
provision for future connection to the Siu Ho Wan side and does not restraint
the planning flexibility of the Siu Ho Wan side. As such it is recommended as
the option to be pursed forward for further study.
Connectivity Option F
·
This option is very similar to Option E, except the
Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) is elevated and the roundabout is
at-grade.
·
Since the roundabout is at-grade and the elevated
Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) above the junction is to be constructed
by others, it offers slightly higher flexibility for future design modification
in case there is significant planning assumption change.
·
The highway design requires a much longer length of
parabolic transition curve for design speed of 80kph. The length of the crest curve is to provide
sufficient forward visibility to the traffic and therefore is related to
traffic safety. On the east side of the
at-grade roundabout, there is not sufficient length for a Road P1 (Tung
Chung – Tai Ho Section) with design speed of 80kph to get down and run
beneath the connecting viaduct to Tai Ho Interchange. Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) with 80kph is
not technically feasible in this arrangement. Therefore in this option Road P1 (Tung
Chung – Tai Ho Section) can only be designed as 50kph.
·
The reduced traffic speed has 2 disadvantages.
Firstly it increases the traffic time of the through traffic. Secondly and more
importantly, although the speed limit is set as 50kph, the relatively straight
configuration of Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) and
without junction for through traffic encourages running speed above 50kph in
practice and is relatively less safe than Option F.
Recommendations
for Connectivity of Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section)
2.7.3.6 Based on the current available information, it is reasonably presumed that a provision needs to be reserved for potential connection between Road P1 and Tai Ho Interchange. Option A not fulfilling this requirement is therefore not pursed.
2.7.3.7 Options C & D provides the required connectivity but the traffic performance is marginal. The reserved traffic capacity for potential new land use and increase in development density is small. These options are therefore not preferred.
2.7.3.8 Option B is good in traffic performance but encroaches into the potential Siu Ho Wan development area. Due to the impact to the flexibility of Siu Ho Wan development, this option is therefore not pursed. Among Options E & F, Option E is slightly better in term of traffic safety and traffic speed. Hence Option E is recommended as the conforming option for this study.
Table 2.30 Comparison
of Connectivity Options (Options A to F) for Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho
Section)
|
Criteria |
Option A |
Option B |
Option C |
Option D |
Option E |
Option F |
|
Reclamation Area# |
~8ha |
~10ha |
~6ha |
~8ha |
~9ha |
~9ha |
|
Planning & Land Use |
·
Severe constraint to development potential of Siu
Ho Wan Area in connectivity |
·
Interchange is within the planning boundary of
Siu Ho Wan development |
· Mild constraint to development potential of Siu Ho Wan Area in connectivity |
·
Interchange is outside the planning boundary of
Siu Ho Wan development |
·
Interchange is outside the planning boundary of
Siu Ho Wan development |
·
Interchange is outside the planning boundary of
Siu Ho Wan development |
|
Traffic |
·
Direct connection to Tai Ho Interchange from Tung
Chung ·
Only traffic along Road P1 to and from Tung Chung
is served ·
No connection between Siu Ho Wan and Tai Ho
Interchange |
·
Provision of additional roundabout for all
traffic movements on Road P1 ·
Future possible
traffic connection to Siu Ho Wan Development ·
Sufficient junction separation to accommodate
queuing traffic |
·
Provision of
additional diamond-type signalised junction for all traffic movements
on Road P1 · Future possible traffic connection to Siu Ho Wan Development · Small junction separation (120m) may reduce the traffic capacity of the junction groups |
·
Provision of additional roundabout for traffic
movements on Road P1 · Future possible traffic connection to Siu Ho Wan Development · Sufficient junction separation to accommodate queuing traffic · Without provision of bypass for the through traffic along Road P1, all traffic would enter the roundabout causing heavy manoeuvring which deteriorates its performance |
·
Provision of additional roundabout for all
traffic movements on Road P1 ·
Future possible
traffic connection to Siu Ho Wan Development ·
Sufficient junction separation to accommodate
queuing traffic ·
The elevated slip road could facilitate
deceleration of entry traffic to the additional roundabout |
·
Provision of additional roundabout for all
traffic movements on Road P1 ·
Future possible
traffic connection to Siu Ho Wan Development ·
Sufficient junction separation to accommodate
queuing traffic ·
The elevated bypass could only operate at 50kph
given that the gradient is constrained by the surrounding structures |
|
Environment |
· Relatively moderate disturbance to seabed due to moderate reclamation in size · Relatively more visual impact as it involves a longer viaduct section |
· Relatively more disturbance to seabed due to largest reclamation in size · Relatively more visual impact as it involves a longer viaduct section and a roundabout near MTR Siu Ho Wan Depot |
· Relatively least disturbance to seabed due to smallest reclamation in size · Relatively least visual impact as the reclamation lies along the coastline and a shorter viaduct section |
· Relatively moderate disturbance to seabed due to moderate reclamation in size · Relatively less visual impact as it involves a shorter viaduct section and an at-grade roundabout to the east of TM-CLKL Southern Connection |
· Relatively more disturbance to seabed due to larger reclamation in size · Relatively more visual impact as it involves a longer viaduct section and an elevated roundabout to the east of TM-CLKL Southern Connection |
· Relatively more disturbance to seabed due to larger reclamation in size · Relatively less visual impact as it involves a shorter viaduct section and an at-grade roundabout to the east of TM-CLKL Southern Connection |
|
Impact to Locals |
· Promenade is reserved |
· Promenade is reserved |
· Promenade is reserved |
· Promenade is reserved |
· Promenade is reserved |
· Promenade is reserved |
|
Engineering |
· Feasible |
· Feasible |
· Feasible · Structural provision allowed in elevated interchange |
· Feasible |
· Feasible · Structural provision allowed in elevated interchange |
· Feasible |
|
Programme |
· Road P1 can be implemented in phase to suit needs for Tung Chung first. |
· Programme and implementation inter-dependent on the Siu Ho Wan development |
· Road P1 can be implemented in phase to suit needs for Tung Chung first. |
· Road P1 can be implemented in phase to suit needs for Tung Chung first. |
· Road P1 can be implemented in phase to suit needs for Tung Chung first. |
· Road P1 can be implemented in phase to suit needs for Tung Chung first. |
|
Cost |
Moderate |
Relatively high |
Relatively low |
Moderate |
Relatively high |
Moderate |
# The reclamation area stated here is measured from
copeline to copeline. The area is
approximate subject to detailed reclamation design.
2.8
Summary of Reclamation Area and Permanent Seabed
Loss Area
2.8.1.1
As
mentioned in Section 1.2, the Project mainly comprises 129.1 ha
reclamation (above high water mark) in which 120.5 ha is reclaimed for TCE and 8.6
ha is reclaimed for Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section). It should be noted that
the reclamation
area is estimated based on the extent of proposed land formation by reclamation
above high water mark while the extent of the development area adopted for this
EIA report is based on the RODP boundary covering all the development land in
TCE and Road P1 (including some of the existing land and the proposed newly
reclaimed land) at development level of approximately +5.5mPD. In addition, the
inclined seawall, with berms and sloping face with gradient of approximately
1:2, will also take up part of the seabed below high water mark level.
Considering the proposed ground level at TCE and Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho
Section) after reclamation is +5.5mPD and the seabed level within the vicinity
is approximately -2 to -5 mPD, the total permanent seabed loss would be
approximately 145 ha. The summary
of the RODP area, reclamation area and total permanent seabed loss is tabulated in Table 2.31 below
and is shown in Figure 2.23.
Table 2.31 Summary of the area of RODP, proposed reclamation and total Permanent seabed loss (For Tung Chung East and Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section))
|
Project
Elements |
Area
(ha) |
||
|
RODP[1] |
Reclamation (above
HWM[2]) |
Total
Permanent Seabed Loss |
|
|
TCE |
122.4 (4 ha in
urbanised area at +5.5mPD) |
120.5 |
132 |
|
Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) |
8.8 (0.5 ha
in urbanised area at +5.5mPD) |
8.6 |
13.0 |
|
Total |
131.2 |
129.1 |
145.0 |
Notes:
[1] RODP boundary covers all the development land
in TCE and Road P1 (including some of the existing land and the proposed newly
reclaimed land) at development level of approximately +5.5mPD.
[2] HWM denotes high water mark
2.9.1.1
According to the current information, the Tung
Chung New Town Extension will be commissioned in phases with first population
intake in Year 2023. The construction major work is targeted to commence in
Year 2017 and completed by Year 2030 for full population intake. The construction
programme is shown in Appendix 2.7.
2.9.1.2
Summary of construction period of the Key
Construction Works is summarized in the following table.
Table 2.32 Summary of key construction works
|
Stages |
Key
Construction Works |
Construction
Period |
|
Advanced
Works |
||
|
Advance Works |
·
Ma Wan Chung Improvement Works ·
Tung Chung Road North ·
Access Road to RO |
·
Early 2017 to Mid 2017 |
|
Reclamation
Works |
||
|
Reclamation Works |
·
Tung Chung East Reclamation ·
Box Culvert Extension ·
Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) Reclamation |
·
Late 2017 to Late 2023 |
|
Tung Chung
East |
||
|
Phase 1 Infrastructures |
·
Road Networks and Cycle Tracks in TCE Phase 1 ·
Fresh Water Supply w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 1 ·
Salt Water Supply w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 1 ·
Saltwater In-take Pumping Station (by others) ·
Drainage w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 1 ·
Sewerage w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 1 ·
New Sewage Pumping Station - TCE West SPS ·
Waterfront Promenade - Phase 1 (by others) |
·
Early 2020 to Mid/Late 2023 |
|
·
Refuse Collection Point (by others) ·
General Clinic / Health Centre (by others) ·
Petrol Filling Station (by others) |
·
Early 2020 to Late 2023 |
|
|
Phase 2 Infrastructures |
·
Road Networks and Cycle Tracks in TCE Phase 2 ·
Fresh Water Supply w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 2 ·
Salt Water Supply w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 2 ·
Drainage w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 2 ·
Sewerage w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 2 ·
Water Front Promenade - Phase 2 (by others) |
·
Late 2020 to Late 2024 |
|
Phase 3 Infrastructures |
·
Road Networks and Cycle Tracks in TCE Phase 3 ·
Salt Water Supply w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 3 ·
Fresh Water Supply w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 3 ·
Drainage w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 3 ·
Sewerage w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 3 ·
Water Front Promenade - Phase 3 (by others) |
·
Late 2022 to Late 2027 |
|
Phase 4 Infrastructures |
·
Road Networks and Cycle Tracks in TCE Phase 4 ·
Drainage w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 4 ·
Salt Water Supply w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 4 ·
Fresh Water Supply w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 4 ·
Sewerage w/ pipelines in TCE Phase 4 ·
New Sewage Pumping Station - TCE East SPS ·
Water Front Promenade - Phase 4 (by others) ·
Police Married Quarters (C0-2) (by others) ·
District Police Station (C0-3) (by others) ·
Secondary School (E-01) (by others) ·
Primary School (E-02) (by others) ·
Primary School (E-03) (by others) ·
Undesignated GIC (E-04) ·
Sports Ground / Sports Centre (F-01) (by others) ·
Primary School (F-02) (by others) ·
Primary School (F-03) (by others) ·
Secondary School (F-04) (by others) ·
Boatyard and Maintenance Area (F-05) (by others) ·
Sports Ground / Sports Centre (G-01) (by others) ·
Post Secondary Institution (G-02) (by others) ·
Fire Station (G-03) (by others) |
·
Early 2024 to Early 2030 |
|
Tung
Chung West |
||
|
Phase 1 Infrastructures |
·
Road Networks and Cycle Track in TCW Phase 1 ·
Fresh Water Supply w/ pipelines in TCW Phase 1 ·
Salt Water Supply w/ pipelines in TCW Phase 1 ·
Drainage w/ pipelines in TCW Phase 1 ·
Attenuation ponds and pumping stations for Tung
Chung West in TCW Phase 1 ·
De-channalisation of channelised portion of Tung
Chung Stream ·
Sewerage w/ pipelines in TCW Phase 1 ·
New Sewage Pumping Station - TCV East SPS |
·
Early 2019 to Late 2023 |
|
Phase 2 Infrastructures |
·
Road Networks and Cycle Track in TCW Phase 2 ·
Bridges in Tung Chung West ·
Fresh Water Supply w/ pipelines in TCW Phase 2 ·
Salt Water Supply w/ pipelines in TCW Phase 2 ·
Drainage w/ pipelines in TCW Phase 2 ·
Attenuation ponds and pumping stations for Tung
Chung West Phase 2 ·
Polder Scheme for Tung Chung West ·
Sewerage w/ pipelines in TCW Phase 2 ·
New Sewage Pumping Station ·
Upgrading Existing Sewage Pumping Station - Tung
Chung West - CMRSPS ·
Water Front Promenade (by others) |
·
Early 2022 to Late 2030 |
|
·
General Clinic / Health Centre (by others) ·
Telephone Exchange (by others) |
·
Early 2022 to Late 2030 |
|
|
·
Sports Ground / Sports Centre (by others) ·
Primary School (by others) |
·
Late 2020 to Late 2024 |
|
|
Others |
||
|
Service Reservoirs |
·
Site Formation Works for Freshwater Service
Reservoir ·
Freshwater Service Reservoir ·
Fresh Water Supply w/ pipelines at Service
Reservoir ·
Site Formation Works for Saltwater Service
Reservoir ·
Saltwater Service Reservoir ·
Salt Water Supply w/ pipelines at Service
Reservoir |
·
Mid 2018 to Mid 2022 |
|
Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) |
·
Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho Section) roadworks,
Slip Roads and Tai Ho Interchange ·
Cycle Track at Road P1 (Tung Chung – Tai Ho
Section) |
·
Early 2021 to Early 2024 |
|
Infrastructure
Works (by others) |
||
|
Phase 1 Infrastructure (by others) |
·
CLP sub-station (by others) |
·
Late 2020 to Late 2023 |
|
·
Upgrading Works of Siu Ho Wan Water Treatment
Works (by others) |
·
Mid 2018 to Mid 2021 |
|
|
·
Fitting-out works of Siu Ho Wan Sewage Treatment
Works (by others) |
·
Mid 2021 to End 2024 |
|
2.9.1.3
Population for the proposed new
development area in Tung Chung East and Tung Chung West will be intake in phase
together with the supporting infrastructures. Based on the implementation of
the supporting infrastructures, the proposed new development will be available
for the population intake as listed in the summary of the schedule of the
population intake in the following table. It is the prediction based on the
early availability of land and phase completion of the supporting
infrastructure to support the population and will still be subjected to change
according to the latest implementation programme and government policy. Locations of
development phasing in TCE and TCW are illustrated in Figures 2.24a and 2.24b.
Table 2.33 Population
intake summary
|
Phase |
Year of Population Intake |
Population Intake (Approximate) |
Cumulative Population Intake
(Approximate) |
|
Tung
Chung East |
|||
|
Phase 1 |
2023 |
23,900 |
23,900 |
|
Phase 2 |
2025 |
13,700 |
37,600 |
|
Phase 3 |
2027 |
37,000 |
74,600 |
|
Phase 4 |
2029 -
2030 |
44,300 |
118,900 |
|
Tung
Chung West |
|||
|
Phase 1 |
2023 |
19,200 |
19,200 |
|
Phase 2 |
2026 to
2030 |
6,300 |
25,500 |