TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

12        Summary of Environmental Outcomes. 12-1

12.1.... Overview.. 12-1

12.2.... Environmental Benefits of the Project 12-1

12.3.... Incorporation of Environmentally Friendly Options. 12-1

12.4.... Environmental Design Recommended. 12-2

12.5.... Key Environmental Problems Avoided and Environmentally Sensitive Areas Protected  12-3

12.6.... Environmental Protection Measures Recommended. 12-4

 

 

 

12               Summary of Environmental Outcomes

12.1           Overview

12.1.1       Section 2 outlines the details and benefit of the Project together with the consideration of alternatives during the preliminary design stage, in which has taken into account of public concern and findings of various engineering and environmental review.  The technical assessments in Section 3 to 12 have demonstrated that all the statutory requirements in EIA Study Brief (ESB-296/2016) and TM-EIAO have been compiled with (Appendix 1.1 refers).

12.1.2       This chapter summarises the key environmental outcomes arising from this EIA study, the approaches that have been adopted to either avoid or minimise various environmental impacts throughout the design process, and the associated environmental enhancements and mitigation measures.

12.2           Environmental Benefits of the Project

12.2.1       The Project aspires to turn the existing depot operation which has industrial activities, to more optimal uses and better land utilisation for property development in Siu Ho Wan area.  The implementation of the Project could result in the following local and strategic benefits:

 

·              Optimise the land resources of an existing 30-ha railway depot site for property development which could create a sustainable community in phases; 

·              Enhance local environment in Siu Ho Wan area through the confinement of future depot operation within a concrete slab/ podium deck such that potential environmental impacts associated with the industrial activities could be minimised; 

·              Increase the flexibility for future land use planning of the Siu Ho Wan area by isolating the industrial interface within a concrete slab/podium deck;

·              Enhance the transportation network in Siu Ho Wan area through the provision of SHO; and

·              Improve the local environment with the provision of SHO which would in future alleviate the traffic burden on the surrounding road network and the associated vehicular emissions and traffic noise in Siu Ho Wan area.

12.3           Incorporation of Environmentally Friendly Options

12.3.1       Avoidance of environmental impacts has been one of the key considerations in this EIA study. For those impacts that could not be avoided, due consideration has been given to minimise those impacts as much as practicable so that all the residual impacts would comply with statutory requirements.  Given the concern collated from the public during the course of EIA study, much emphasis have been given to avoid encroachment of recongnized sites of conservation importance such as Tai Ho Priority Site and The Brothers Marine Park located to the south of the Project.  All these approaches to avoid environmental impacts have been adopted in the development of the Project.  A summary of these approaches is given below: 

·                Avoidance of encroachment into recognized sites of conservation importance;

·                Avoidance of emergency discharge for sewage pumping station (SPS);

·                Avoidance of marine transportation; and

·                Minimisation of environmental impacts to SHD Topside Development.

Avoidance of encroachment into Recognized Sites of Conservation Importance

12.3.2       During the planning and conceptual design stage, recognised sites of conservation importance in the vicinity of the SHD have been identified and avoided in the selection of temporary works area and the design of permanent works for western access and local accesses.  As such, there would be no impact to recognised sites of conservation importance arising from the construction and operation of the Project.

Avoidance of Emergency Discharge from Sewage Pumping Station

12.3.3       Emergency discharge of sewage from SPS could result due to failure of power supply and/or pump operation.  To avoid the emergency sewage discharge, a total of three pumps (two for duty and one for standby in operation) will be adopted to cater for emergency breakdown or maintenance of the duty pump.  In addition, backup power supply in the form of dual-feed power supply would be provided to secure electrical power supply.  An emergency storage tank / spare volume of wet well would be provided for the SPS to cater for breakdown and maintenance of duty pump.  Twin rising mains system would be adopted to facilitate maintenance works and to avoid emergency sewage discharge. With incorporation of the recommended preventive measures, emergency sewage discharge is not anticipated. 

Avoidance of Marine Transportation

12.3.4       Marine transportation for construction materials and spoil during the construction phase of the Project have been avoided as far as possible to minimize marine traffic and associated potential impacts on marine environment.        

Minimisation of Environmental Impact to SHD Topside Development

12.3.5       The major construction noise source is identified as the piling works in each stage of replanning works, the quieter construction method, i.e. bored piling method instead of percussive piling, will be adopted for the foundation works to minimize potential impacts to the environment as well as to SHD Topside Development.  In addition, construction of the concrete slab would be completed as soon as possible in respective staging area, such that the remaining replanning works could be conducted under the concrete slab to minimize construction noise impacts.

12.3.6       Depot replanning sequences will also maximize the decking area as far as practicable over the tracks in operation for minimisation of the potential noise impacts arising from depot operation to earlier phases of the SHD Topside Development. 

12.4           Environmental Design Recommended

12.4.1       Other than initiatives to avoid environmental impacts as summarised in Section 12.3, further efforts have been exercised to minimise impacts. The need for any environmental designs required to mitigate the associated impacts have also been identified and will be implemented, as appropriate. A summary of these approaches is given below: 

·             Adoption of environmental friendly construction method;

·             Adoption of proactive measures to avoid illegal dumping;

·             Provision of noise mitigation measures; and

·             Implementation of environmental monitoring and auditing system.

 

Adoption of Environmental Friendly Construction Method

12.4.2       As stated in Section 12.3.4, quieter construction method, i.e. bored piling method, will be adopted for the foundation of the SHD Topside Development to minimize potential impacts to the environment.  

Adoption of Proactive Measures to Avoid Illegal Dumping

12.4.3       Adoption of global positioning system (GPS) or equivalent system for tracking and monitoring of all dump trucks will be engaged for the Project in order to prohibit illegal dumping and landfilling of excavated materials generated from the Project.        

Provision of Railway Noise Mitigation Measures

12.4.4       Implementation of the Project would eliminate the industrial interface in stages and ultimately isolate the industrial activities under concrete slab.  Railway noise impact associated with existing SHD operation at some NSRs is anticipated before the commencement of Stage 3 SHD Replanning Works.  Provision of temporary mitigation measures including noise barriers of about 12m high and canopies at the podium edge during the interim interfacing period of about 30 months are therefore recommended to mitigate the noise impact from the existing SHD operation at Stage 3 and 4 areas.  

12.4.5       A package of mitigation measures including self-protecting building design with provision of canopy along the podium edge of SHD Topside Development would be adopted to mitigate the railway noise from TCL/AEL.  As stated in SHD Topside Development EIA, alternative approaches in noise mitigation package could be further explored by the Project Proponent of SHD Topside Development. 

Implementation of Environmental Monitoring and Auditing System

12.4.6       In addition to the mitigation measures as described above (see more details in the Project Implementation Schedule as given in Appendix 11.1), a comprehensive environmental monitoring and auditing programme would be implemented to cover various aspects of concern.  An independent environmental checker would also be employed to ensure that all the necessary mitigation measures are implemented in a timely and orderly manner.

12.5           Key Environmental Problems Avoided and Environmentally Sensitive Areas Protected

12.5.1       Sections 12.2 and 12.3 have summarised the key approaches adopted in the current proposal to avoid, minimise and mitigate environmental impacts. Some of these approaches have contributed to avoid a number of environmental problems and to protect a number of environmentally sensitive areas. Table 12.1 presents the key environmental problems that have been avoided and any sensitive areas protected by these approaches.

Table 12.1   Summary of Key Environmental Problems Avoided and Sensitive Areas Protected

Design Approach

Environmental Problems Avoided and Sensitive Areas Protected

Avoidance of encroachment into Recognized Sites of Conservation Importance (Section 12.3.2)

·         Encroachment of recongnized sites of conservation importance such as Tai Ho Priority Site and The Brothers Marine Park have been avoided. 

Avoidance of emergency discharge for SPS (Section 12.3.3)

·         The recommended preventive and design measures would protect the inland watercourses and downstream of the SPS.

Avoidance of illegal dumping (Section 12.4.3)

·         The recommended preventive measures would avoid/minimise the chance of illegal dumping.

Avoidance of Marine Transportation
(Section 12.3.5)

·         Minimization of marine traffic and associated potential impacts on marine environment as a result of avoidance of marine transportation as far as possible

Minimisation of environmental impacts to SHD Topside Development (Section 12.3.6 – 12.3.7)

·         Careful planning and design has been adopted to minimise the industrial and construction interface issues between existing SHD and SHD Topside Development.

Adoption of environmental friendly construction method

·         Adoption of quiet piling method to minimise the construction noise impact

Providing direct noise mitigation measures (Section 12.4.4 – 12.4.5)

·         NSRs are protected to achieve the statutory noise requirements.

Implementation of Environmental Monitoring and Auditing System
(Section 12.4.4)

·         Ensure all the recommended measures are properly in place and their effectiveness.

12.6           Environmental Protection Measures Recommended

12.6.1       Mitigation measures have been recommended to further reduce the environmental impacts due to construction and operation of the Project. Key recommended mitigation measures and any associated benefits are summarised in Table 12.2 below.

Table 12.2   Key Recommended Mitigation Measures

Environmental Aspect

Mitigation Measure and any Associated Benefit

Air Quality Impact

·         Implementing relevant control measures as required in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation to minimise dust generation.

·         Watering once per hour on active works areas, exposed areas and unpaved haul roads during the construction phase to minimise dust impact.

·         Provision of deodorizer at the planned SPS to minimise potential odour nuisance.

Noise Impact

·         Adoption of quiet powered mechanical equipment (QPME), movable noise barriers and enclosures to mitigate the construction noise impact.

·         Adoption of temporary noise measures including 12m high cantilevered barrier, noise canopy of 7m and 15m wide at podium level and architectural fins to mitigate railway noise associated with existing SHD operation.

·         Provision of noise mitigation measures including with provision of canopy along the podium edge of SHD Topside Development to alleviate the railway noise impact from TCL/AEL operation.

·         Provision of acoustic measures where necessary for the planned fixed plant to ensure noise compliance.

Water Quality Impact

·         The mitigation measures as detailed in the ProPECCPN 1/94 “Construction Site Drainage” as well as other good site practices are recommended to minimise the potential water quality impacts from the construction activities.

·         Various precautionary measures are proposed to be incorporated in the design of the SPS and rising mains to avoid emergency discharge and leakage of sewage to the maximum practicable extent.

Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Implications

·         Various preventive and design measures are recommended for the proposed SPS to prevent emergency discharge and thus protect the downstream water quality.

Waste Management Implications

·         Implementation of good site practices and waste reduction measures (e.g. reuse of construction and demolition (C&D) materials as far as practicable before off-site disposal or develop a materials recovery and recycling programme during construction and operation).

·         Preparation of an Environmental Management Plan (EMP), which includes the Waste Management Plan (WMP).

·         Implement a trip-ticket system for each works contract in accordance with DEVB TC(W) No. 6/2010 to ensure that the disposal of C&D materials are properly documented and verified.

·         Adopt GPS or equivalent system for tracking and monitoring of all dump trucks engaged for the Project in recording their travel routings and parking locations to prohibit illegal dumping and landfilling of C&D materials.

·         Handling of chemical waste in accordance with the Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes, and disposal of chemical waste at licensed chemical waste recycling / treatment facilities.

Land Contamination Impact

·         Prior to the commencement of the site investigation (SI) works, review the Contamination Assessment Plan (CAP) provided in Appendix 8.1 to confirm whether the proposed SI works (e.g. sampling locations, testing parameters etc.) are still valid and to confirm the appropriate RBRGs land use scenario for the development.

·         Should any changes in operation which lead to any new or the relocation of contamination hotspots or occurrence of spillage or accident be found in the review, supplementary CAP(s), presenting the findings of the review, the latest site conditions and updated sampling strategy and testing protocol, should be submitted to EPD for endorsement.

·         The SI works should be carried out according to EPD’s approved CAP(s).

·         Contamination Assessment Report(s) (CAR(s)) should be prepared to present the findings of the SI works and to discuss the presence, nature and extent of contamination.  If contamination is identified in the CAR(s), Remediation Action Plan(s) (RAP(s)) which provides details of the remedial actions for the identified contaminated soil and/or groundwater should be developed prior to construction works at the concerned area.  Submission to EPD for endorsement of the supplementary CAP(s), CAR(s) and, if required, RAP would be carried out in stages according to the programme of SHD Replanning Works.

·         If required, carry out soil/groundwater remediation works according to EPD agreed RAP(s) and submit Remediation Report(s) (RR(s)) afterwards for EPD agreement. The remediation works should be completed and RR(s) demonstrating the completion of remediation works at the area(s) (if any) confirmed with contamination will be prepared and submitted to EPD for approval prior to the commencement of construction works at the contaminated areas.

Landscape and Visual Impact

·         CM1 - Trees unavoidably affected by the works should be transplanted as far as possible in accordance with DEVB TC(W) 7/2015 – Tree Preservation or LAO PN 7/2007- Tree Preservation and Tree Removal Application for Building Development in Private Projects where applicable.

·         CM2 - Control of night-time lighting glare.

·         CM3 - Erection of decorative screen hoarding which should be compatible with the surrounding setting.

·         CM4 - Management of facilities on work sites by controlling the height and disposition/arrangement of all facilities on the works site to minimize visual impact to adjacent VSRs.

·         CM5 - All hard and soft landscape areas disturbed temporarily during construction should be reinstated on like-to-like basis, to the satisfaction of the relevant Government Departments.

·         OM1 - Aesthetically pleasing design as regard to the form, material and finishes shall be incorporated to SHD, SHO and other aboveground structures so as to blend in the existing and future structures to the adjacent landscape and visual context. 

·         OM2 - All lighting should be carefully designed and controlled to minimize light pollution and night-time glare to nearby VSRs, and to blend in the existing adjacent landscape and visual context.

·         OM3 - Compensatory planting shall be determined during the Tree Removal Application process under DEVB TC(W) No. 7/2015  or LAO PN 7/2007 where applicable.  Compensatory planting will be implemented by future developer(s) of SHD Topside Development. 

Hazard to Life

·         Emergency planning, training and drill for construction workers will be provided as precautionary measures during construction phase to further reduce the risk.

12.7           Estimation of Population Protected

12.7.1        With careful planning and design of the Project, together with the implementation of mitigation measures recommended in this EIA Report, the protected populations include:

·             the population in permanent railway depot facilities which have been planned to be located outside the consultation zone of SHWWTW such that no significant increase in hazard to life; and

·             the residents of SHD Topside Development (about 37,800 population) to be protected from railway and fixed plant noise associated with the Project.