Policy Comments & Advocacy

In General

1. In view that the statutory Town Planning Guideline under Town Planning Ordinance (TPO) will be breached, Green Power urges the Administration to withdraw the parts infringing Wetland Conservation Area (WCA) and Wetland Buffer Area (WBA) in above-captioned Proposal (the Proposal).

2. On the other hand, the relevant consultation materials disseminate some misconceptions that act contrary to the good will of initiatives of conservation, carbon neutrality and climate resilience, and mislead the public, relevant potential sectors and industries participated in the proposed Proposal. More importantly, the misconceptions would result in public’s misunderstanding towards these profound concepts. Professional interpretation for these environmental and ecological concepts should be sought.

3. The Proposal should aim at improving the regional environmental quality, regulating incompatible land uses, and establishing a self-sustainable and low-carbon city model for the territory.

Land Uses

4. Different from the Preliminary Outline Development Plan (PODP) for the San Tin / Lok Ma Chau (LMC) Development Node formulated in September 2019, the expanded development area (expanded area) in San Tin / LMC in Recommended Outline Development Plan (RODP) formulated in 2021 discussed in the Development Panel of the Legislative Council involves <u>massive reclamation of fishponds and wetlands in WCA and WBA</u> for Innovation and Technology (I&T) land use which violates the planning intention of WCA.

5. Under Town Planning Board Guidelines for application for developments within Deep Bay area under section 16 of the TPO (TPB PG-NO. 12C) (Revised May 2014) ⁽¹⁾, the reclamation of fishponds/wetlands in expanded area in WCA obviously breaches the principle of “no-net-loss in wetland”.

6. “New development within the WCA would not be allowed unless it is required to support the conservation of the ecological value of the area or the development is an essential infrastructural project with overriding public interest. Any such development should be supported by an ecological impact assessment to demonstrate that the development would not result in a net loss in wetland function and negative disturbance impact.” (Sec. 6.1, TPB PG-NO. 12C) The I&T land use neither support the conservation of the ecological value of the area nor the development is an essential infrastructural project with overriding public interest.

7. The rationale of delineation of the Proposal boundary and presumed overriding public interest involved in TPB PG-NO.12C should be clearly stated to avoid any vague interpretation of TPB PG-NO.12C or open a flood gate for private developments in WCA and WBA.

8. Although expected planning parameters will breach the statutory planning requirements/guidelines/ordinances by the Proposal, neither open and transparent official/statutory procedures nor approval by relevant authourities are proposed in the consultation document.

9. For any infringement of Ramsar Site boundary in Deep Bay area, the Administration should clarify if any articles of Ramsar Convention are violated, and notify and seek approval from national and international Ramsar Authority.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

10. Alternative options for the Proposal to avoid infringement of WCA and WBA should be provided and discussed in EIA report under EIA Ordinance.

11. In view of the major amendments in the Proposed site compared to the Project Profile of San Tin / Lok Ma Chau Development Node, especially in the expanded area, substantial change in environmental impacts will be resulted. Thus, EIA should be conducted in detail, especially for the expanded area, for ecology, water quality of Deep Bay marine environment and freshwater bodies such as river channels, fishponds, gei wais.

12. According to consultation materials, “San Tin Technopole will have to cater for the land uses of different I&T fields and different stages of the I&T value chain, as well as the needs for talent accommodation and other supporting facilities. It is suggested to formulate a wider range of permitted uses which are compatible with each other for I&T land.” Therefore, such flexible and administrative approach for I&T land use renders the environmental, ecological, drainage and transport impacts difficult to address and assess. In view of the scale of the Proposal, i.e. site area, wetland area loss(about 90ha in WCA), development density (highest plot ratio 6), population, commercial and industrial activities (120 000 jobs in I&T land out of 165 000 jobs in whole Proposal site), the strategy to avoid, mitigate and compensate the environmental impacts is hard to formulate without any reliable basis.

13. As “The Innovation, Technology and Industry Bureau (ITIB) will commence shortly a consultancy study on the development plan for San Tin Technopole with a view to recommending specific I&T uses in the I&T value chain for development on different land parcels in San Tin Technopole”, the results of this consultancy study should be included in statutory planning procedures and EIA processes.

Misconceptions

14. Regarding this Proposal, we disagree that “The blue-green network also creates ecological linkages to enhance biodiversity”, especially for the expanded area comprising mainly fishponds and wetlands. Continuous large area of fishponds and wetlands in Deep Bay area is proven of internationally ecological important. Blue-green network mentioned in the consultation materials is mainly to improve the urban living environment.

15. In this case, biodiversity in both qualitative, i.e. loss of internationally important wetlands, and quantitative sense, i.e. area of such wetlands reclaimed, is definitely lost rather than enhanced by blue-green network.

16. Scientifically, wetlands are well known for their carbon sequestration function ⁽²⁾. In this proposal, large area of fishponds will be reclaimed and lost, and their carbon sequestration function will be ceased totally. Even worse, development in this Proposal will generate considerable amount of greenhouse gases through building energy consumption, vehicular exhaust gas, waste disposal, sewage treatment in view of the proposed development scale, population and activities.

17. The administration needs to rationalize how the Proposal can “align with Hong Kong’s Climate Action Plan 2050’s call for green planning and developing carbon neutral community and to address climate change.” At least a broad-brush carbon audit should be done to demonstrate the carbon balance of foreseen “carbon neutral community” in the Proposal. A formal carbon audit should be conducted in order to achieve a carbon neutral community in finalized development plan. In this regard, detailed and feasible measures should be in place to balance the carbon budget of the Proposal.

18. Wetland Conservation Parks (WCPs) proposed in Northern Metropolis plan ⁽³⁾ is a “proactive conservation” approach which existing intrinsic ecological value is well recognized. However, in the consultation material WCPs are positioned as “compensatory”. While large area of candidate WCP will be lost to I&T lands, the rationale how the remaining and existing candidate WCP can be considered as compensation for the lost part should be explained.

19. The vague interpretation of the term “Environmental Capacity” ⁽⁴⁾ should also be defined (versus carrying capacity) ⁽⁵⁾, and how this term is applied in the Proposal should be provided in more details.

Wastewater

20. Non-point source pollution and Proposal site surface runoff should not be discharged or directed to the watercourses during the construction phase. Alternation of the existing natural watercourses should be minimized as far as possible.

21. Zero-discharge policy in Deep Bay Area should be strictly observed for discharge of wastewater for the Project.

Brownfield Proliferation

22. Over 80 ha of land in the Proposal Site is occupied by brownfield operations. The proposed development under the Proposal will likely trigger the spreading of brownfields to the nearby rural areas and countryside including the WCA and WBA in the Deep Bay Area threatening the fishponds, farmlands, and wetlands.

23. Therefore, a proper reallocation and/or compensation plan for the existing brownfield operations should be formulated in the early stage to prevent an expansion of unfavorable and uncontrollable land uses at the periphery of the Project Site.

Air Quality

24. The Proposal site is in the Yuen Long District which is highly prone to air pollution. According to the EPD’s yearly average Air Quality and Health Index (AQHI) data from 2014 to 2022, Yuen Long ranked the top three most polluting districts in terms of the number of hours with AQHI ≥7 and days with daily maximum AQHI ≥7 in at least seven consecutive years.

25. In the light of the current unsatisfactory air quality, the project proponent should fully assess the air quality impacts anticipated in the Proposal and formulate effective mitigation measures to control the air pollution. In addition, certain polluting industrial/commercial activities should be forbidden in order not to worsen the air quality.

Ecology

26. Provided that there will be a prominent increase in population and employment in San Tin /LMC area, the road and footpath networks should be designed in a way that deters the people from entering the ecologically sensitive zones.

27. Revitalizing the closed Ngau Tam Mei Landfill within the Project Site and designating the hillslope and uplands surrounding the Proposal site as Country Parks should be considered as an ecological compensation measure to enhance habitat quality and minimizing the risk of hill fire.

Transportation

28. The detailed design plan of the proposed Northern Link (NOL) railway has not been mentioned in the Proposal. It is recommended to adopt an underground tunnel railway option to minimize the permanent environmental impacts such as habitat fragmentation and noise pollution. Tunnel option can also avoid community segregation and save lands for other uses.

29. Comprehensive green transportation strategic plan should be formulated to introduce green initiatives to reduce the potential transport-induced environmental impacts and carbon emission.

30. In view of the predicted passenger and freight transport need, we wonder if the alignment of proposed Northern Metropolis Highway proposed in “Strategic Studies on Railways and Major Roads beyond 2030” and planned NOL will be amended accordingly which are supposed to serve the need of formerly proposed San Tin/Lok Ma Chau Development Node.

Solid Waste

31. Fly-tipping and illegal dumping should be strictly prohibited during the implementation of the Proposal because the areas around the Proposal site are notorious for destruction of ecological sensitive sites by massive dumping of wastes and debris, especially C&D waste. Regrettably, restoration of filled farmlands, fishponds or wetlands are non-enforceable, inefficient, or impractical in most cases.

32. Comprehensive recycling implementation plan and network in the Proposal site should be formulated to promote a zero-waste community (including the neighboring villages).

Thank you very much for your kind attention. For any inquiries, please contact the undersigned at Green Power (T: 3961 0200, F: 2314 2661, Email: info@greenpower.org.hk).