3          Consideration of Alternatives

3.1      Site Selection

3.1.1.1           There are only two acute hospitals provided with helipad for air transportation of medical emergency cases, namely PYNEH and TMH in Hong Kong.  However, there are different constraints for both helipads for air transportation of medical emergency cases to serve the western and southern part of Hong Kong.  In order to complement the operation gaps and the emergency service requirements, there is a need to explore an alternative site for a helipad.

3.1.1.2           There are three acute hospitals with A&E services and located at western/ southern part of Hong Kong, i.e. Pok Oi Hospital, Queen Mary Hospital and Yan Chai Hospital.  In considerations of factors on type of hospital and medical services, location, space availability and environmental benefit and dis-benefit, QMH is the selected location for installation of the helipad.

3.2      Development Options

3.2.1.1           With reference to Clause 3.3 of the EIA Study Brief, 5 alternative development options have been considered for the Project as presented in Figure 3.1.  Consideration has been given to the following alternatives:

·                  Option 1: Adjacent hillside area of QMH;

·                  Option 2: Existing vacant area in QMH;

·                  Option 3: Rooftop of existing buildings within QMH;

·                  Option 4a: Helipad siting at the centre of the rooftop of New Block; and

·                  Option 4b: Helipad siting at the north-east of the rooftop of New Block.

3.2.1.2           The comments for the 5 alternative development options are summarised in Table 3.1 below.

Table 3.1    Comments for Alternative Development Options

Alternative Options of Helipad Siting	Preferable Option?	Comment
Option 1 - Adjacent Hillside Area of QMH	û	This option is NOT suitable due to the operational constraints from helipad to hospital and the possible ecological impact to the surrounding hillside area.
Option 2 - Existing Vacant Area within QMH	û	This option is NOT considered due to insufficient vacant space in QMH for the Proposed Helipad.
Option 3 - Rooftop of Existing Buildings in QMH	û	This option is NOT considered. The existing buildings in QMH was not designed for helicopter landing and the building structure is unable to support the loading of helipad and helicopter.
Option 4a - Helipad Siting at the Centre of the Rooftop of New Block	û	The rooftop of New Block will be the highest location in the QMH which provides a better condition for helicopter landings and away from obstacles (Option 4a). This option is more preferable.  To further minimise the noise impact, the positioning of the helipad is carefully considered. Position the Proposed Helipad from centre to north-eastern side at rooftop of New Block could increase the separation distance and provide noise screening to some NSRs.  Option 4b is selected.
Option 4b - Helipad Siting at the North-East of the Rooftop of New Block	ü

 

3.2.1.3           Option 4b is chosen as the best option as it provides a better condition for helicopter landings, away from obstacles and the distance between noise sensitive receivers (NSRs).

3.3      Selection of Flight Sectors

3.3.1.1           The flight sector design for the Proposed Helipad shall allow minimum impacts to the immediate surroundings and ensure flight safety which was carefully investigated by the Government Flying Service (GFS).  Four flight sector options as below have been considered based on the associated noise impact on noise sensitive receivers, terrain condition, obstacles clearance and other ambient conditions such as wind and turbulence.

·                  Zone 1: North-west of QMH;

·                  Zone 2: East of QMH;

·                  Zone 3: South QMH; and

·                  Zone 4: South-west of QMH

3.3.1.2           Zone 1 (North-west) and Zone 3 (South) are selected by GFS as the optimum operation zones for safe helicopter operations with minimum environmental impact on the immediate surrounding which are shown in Figure 3.2.

3.4      Helipad Management Alternatives

3.4.1.1           Upon the completion of the helipad in QMH, the heli-services would be shared among the existing helipad facilities in TMH, PYNEH and the new helipad at QMH.  The transportation of patients to which hospital will depend on a number of factors including the proximity of the hospital, nature of the incident, weather condition, wind velocity, etc.  It should also take into account of the uniqueness of certain emergency medical cases.  Hence, management/ administrative measures that HA will take on the heli-service diversion among the existing and future hospitals are very much depended on the above mentioned factors and the professional opinion of HA and GFS.

3.5      Type of Helicopter

3.5.1.1           As advised by GFS, there is a replacement programme for the existing helicopter fleet which will be completed before 2024, the year of commencement of operation of the Proposed Helipad.  The new helicopters will be equipped with more advanced engines and will provide a quieter flight compared with the existing helicopters in general.

3.6      Construction Alternatives

3.6.1.1           There are 3 methods for constructing the Proposed Helipad have been put forward as below:

·                  Helipad constructed by in-situ concrete (Option 1)

·                  Helipad constructed by steel structure prefabricated off-site (Option 2)

·                  Helipad main structure constructed by in-situ concrete and cantilevered structure constructed by prefabricated steelwork (Option 3)

3.6.1.2           The environmental impact brought about by the proposed construction methods are similar for the three methods.  Option 3 is the preferred method with consideration to the nature of the proposed construction methods, costs and construction programme.

3.7      “Without Project” Scenario

3.7.1.1           Without the Project, emergency patients and casualties will continue to be landed at PYNEH or TMH, but those landings may be precluded or restricted due to adverse weather or safety consideration. In addition, situation like the Lamma Island vessel collision incident when casualties require multiple air-lifting might have to be diverted to more than one hospital but lacking shared helipad facilities, will result in cases that have to be transferred to QMH by ambulance after the helicopter landing at Wan Chai Heliport. This arrangement is undesirable as valuable time is lost in the transportation leading to critical patients unable to receive treatment in the shortest possible time.

3.7.1.2           QMH is the only hospital in Hong Kong that is equipped to handle certain emergency/critical medical cases. Without the helipad service, speedy treatment such as immediate transfer of donated organs and patients for instantaneous treatment will not be possible.

3.7.1.3           As such, if the project is not implemented, it will have an undesirable effect on the speedy provision of care services to the critical patients and on responding to emergency situation in particular to patients with life-threatening conditions in the best possible time, as the transfer of patients to hospital is unnecessarily prolonged.