For discussion PWSC(96-97)59
on 6 November 1996

ITEM FOR PUBLIC WORKS SUBCOMMITTEE
OF FINANCE COMMITTEE

HEAD 707 - NEW TOWNS AND URBAN AREA DEVELOPMENT
Hong Kong Island and Islands Development
(Civil Engineering - Land development)
433CL - Yung Shue Wan development, engineering works

Members are invited to recommend to Finance Committee -

1. the upgrading of part of 433CL, entitled "Yung Shue Wan development, engineering works, phase 1", to Category A at an estimated cost of $49.8 million in money-of-the-day prices; and
2. the retention of the remainder of 433CL in Category B, retitled "Yung Shue Wan development, engineering works, phase 2".

---

PROBLEM
PROPOSAL
PROJECT SCOPE AND NATURE
JUSTIFICATION
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS
LAND ACQUISITION
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
433CL - Yung Shue Wan development, engineering works -- Details of objections and our responses
Islands District Board -- Extracts from the Minutes of Special Meeting held on 15 July 1996 (Monday) at 10:00 a.m.
433CL - Yung Shue Wan development, engineering works -- Supplementary Information

---

PROBLEM

There is a lack of land at Yung Shue Wan for the provision of essential infrastructure to meet the needs in the area.

PROPOSAL

2. The Director of Territory Development (DTD), with the support of the Secretary for Planning, Environment and Lands, proposes to upgrade part of 433CL to Category A at an estimated cost of $49.8 million in money-of-the-day (MOD) prices for reclaiming and servicing about 1.1 hectares of land at the south of Yung Shue Wan.

PROJECT SCOPE AND NATURE

3. The full scope of 433CL comprises engineering works to provide 2.3 hectares of formed and serviced land in Yung Shue Wan for -

1. essential facilities including a combined refuse/construction waste transfer station, a sewage treatment plant, rural workshops, a dangerous goods store, a building materials depot, loading/unloading areas and parking areas for village vehicles;
2. government uses including a police post, a library, a market and a refuse collection point;
3. institutions and community facilities; and
4. commercial/residential development.

4. The phase 1 works we now propose to upgrade to Category A will provide formed and serviced land in the southern part of Yung Shue Wan for the provision of the facilities mentioned in paragraph 3 (a) above. The works comprise -

1. construction of 300 metres of vertical seawall and 170 metres of rubble mound seawall;
2. reclamation of about 1.1 hectares of land for the provision of facilities;
3. construction of an emergency vehicular access;
4. construction of associated drainage and sewerage works; and
5. implementation of landscape works including planting beds and trees.

JUSTIFICATION

5. Due to natural growth and residents moving in from the urban area, the population of Yung Shue Wan has increased from about 2 000 in 1989 to about 4 000 at present. With the rapid growth in population, the environment of Yung Shue Wan is deteriorating. Leakage and overflows from existing septic tanks are polluting Yung Shue Wan. Due to a lack of suitable facilities, the handling of construction materials, refuse and construction waste is causing obstruction and nuisance to the public. There is an urgent need to remedy the situation and to provide adequate and improved infrastructural facilities in the area.

6. We plan to implement works in two phases to improve the situation. The phase 1 works will provide formed and serviced land for the essential facilities listed in paragraph 3(a), with a view to resolving the problems stated in paragraph 5 above. Among these facilities are a combined refuse/construction waste transfer station and a sewage treatment plant which will help to improve the existing undesirable sanitary and environmental conditions at Yung Shue Wan. Others like rural workshops, dangerous goods store and building materials depot at the southern tip of Yung Shue Wan will provide a more appropriate location for activities which are incompatible with the existing village settlement. Upon completion of these facilities, there will be a more pleasant environment at Yung Shue Wan for both residents and visitors.

7. We plan to commission the combined refuse/construction waste transfer station and the sewage treatment plant in mid 1999 and late 2000 respectively under separate public works programme items. We therefore need to commence phase 1 works in March 1997 in order to provide the land required for these developments.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

8. We estimate the capital cost of the project to be $49.8 million in MOD prices (see paragraph 9 below), made up as follows -

9. Subject to approval, we will phase the expenditure as follows -

10. We have derived the MOD estimate on the basis of the Government’s forecasts of trend labour and construction prices for the period 1997 to 2000. We will tender the works under a fixed-price re-measurement contract because the project involves dredging and foundation works for the seawall. The precise extent of these works is likely to be subject to variation during construction depending on the actual site conditions encountered. As the contract period is less than 21 months, the contract will not provide for adjustments to the tender price due to inflation.

11. We estimate the annually recurrent expenditure to be $300,000 of which $50,000 (in respect of the sewerage works) will be a charge to the Sewage Services Trading Fund. Subject to the Legislative Council passing a Resolution on appropriation of assets to the Trading Fund, the sewerage works under the project will, upon completion, become assets in the Fund valued at cost.

12. The associated sewerage works included in this project would have no impact sewerage charges.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

13. We consulted the Islands District Board and the Lamma Area Committee on the proposed phase 1 works on 25 April 1994 and 25 May 1994 respectively. Both supported the proposal. In addition, we held two public briefings with local residents on 18 June 1994 and 25 June 1994 to further explain the purpose of the proposed works. Most residents supported the proposed reclamation which will provide the essential infrastructure necessary to improve the sanitary and environmental conditions of the area. They also sought early implementation of the project. On the other hand, a small number of residents raised some general concerns on the project’s probable impact on the rural character of Yung Shue Wan.

14. We gazetted the phase 1 works under the Foreshore and Sea-bed (Reclamations) Ordinance and the Roads (Works, Use and Compensation) Ordinance on 19 August 1994 and 26 August 1994 respectively. Altogether, we received 145 objections under the two Ordinances. Details of the objections and our responses are at Enclosure 1.

15. We held a public briefing for the objectors on 21 January 1995 to address their concerns. 144 objectors refused to withdraw their objections. Subsequently, the Governor in Council overruled these objections in the public interest and authorised the proposed works without modifications or conditions on 16 January 1996.

16. After the PWSC meeting on 4 June 1996 (see paragraph 25), we presented the phase 1 works again to the Islands District Board on 15 July 1996. Members of Islands District Board re-affirmed their support for the proposed works and unanimously passed a motion urging the Administration to implement the project as soon as possible. A copy of the notes of the District Board meeting is at Enclosure 2.

17. About 100 of the objections mentioned in paragraph 15 were related to the proposed developments under phase 2 of the project. As we plan to commence the phase 2 works in 2000, we will further consult the residents and take into account their views where appropriate in the planning and design of the phase 2 works.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

18. The Director of Environmental Protection (DEP) completed an Environmental Review of the phase 1 works in December 1993 and concluded that no Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was necessary.

19. To minimise long term environmental impacts, we will construct rubble mound seawalls for the reclamation of the sewage treatment plant site to facilitate the recolonization of marine fauna and use low height retaining walls with replanting to reduce the impact on existing vegetated slopes. The planting along the proposed seawall serves as a screen to reduce the visual impact of the reclamation. We will include amenity planting alongside the emergency vehicular access and re-establish native woodland at the toe of the slope to ensure that the proposed development will blend in well with the surroundings.

20. To address short term impacts, we will control dust, noise, site run-off, water quality and dredging activities during construction by incorporating appropriate mitigation measures in the works contract. In addition, we will require the contractor to barge all construction and filling materials direct to the construction site by sea to avoid any noise nuisance due to land transport, as recommended by DEP.

21. We consulted the Advisory Council on the Environment on 10 July 1995. The Council considered the proposed phase 1 works environmentally acceptable. Individual follow-on projects such as the refuse transfer station and the sewage treatment plant under phase 2 will be subject to separate EIAs.

LAND ACQUISITION

22. The proposed works require the clearance of 0.6 hectares of Government land. The clearance will affect ten households involving 44 people. The Director of Housing will offer these families accommodation in public housing in line with existing housing policies. We will charge the cost of clearance, estimated at $1 million, to Head 701 - Land Acquisition.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

23. We included 433CL in Category B in July 1994. The Director of Civil Engineering has completed the detailed design and drawings for phase 1 works using in-house staff. We plan to start the works in March 1997 for overall completion in September 1998. We will arrange early hand-over of the refuse transfer station site to DEP in mid 1998.

24. Upon completion of necessary studies and consultation with the relevant advisory and local bodies, we plan to implement the remaining phase 2 works of 433CL, in a further stage commencing in 2000 for completion by 2002.

25. Members discussed the proposed phase 1 works at the PWSC meeting held on 4 June 1996. While Members generally supported the need to improve the basic infrastructure of the area, they considered that the design did not adequately address the preservation of the natural environment including the natural shoreline of Yung Shue Wan. They asked the Administration to review the design and to provide more information, including District Board’s comments and the revisions made to the original plan in response to objections. The required information are now provided in paragraph 16 and Enclosure 3 respectively.

---

Enclosure 1 to PWSC(96-97)59

433CL - Yung Shue Wan development, engineering works -- Details of objections and our responses

The majority of the objections were in the form of a standard letter with minor variations. The main points of the objections and our responses were as follows -

Main Objections Our response

---

Enclosure 2 to PWSC(96-97)59

Islands District Board -- Extracts from the Minutes of Special Meeting held on 15 July 1996 (Monday) at 10:00 a.m.

II. Yung Shue Wan Development, Engineering Works, Phase I

(Paper IDB 54/96)

18. The Chairman introduced to members the following officials who attended for discussion of this item :

1. Mr Peter So, Acting DPM/HKI & Is; and
2. Mr P C Wong, Senior Engineer.

19. Mr P C Wong took members through the paper and briefed them on the concerns/reservations that had been expressed by LegCo Members when the project was recently put before PWSC for allocation of funds. LegCo Members had specifically stated that the future re-submission to PWSC should include a section on IsDB’s views.

20. The Chairman questioned the basis of PWSC’s position. He considered it a matter for regret that PWSC did not see its way to approving the funds sought when it was clearly put to them that the concerns raised by the environmentalists had been given a full hearing and that the project had the endorsement of both IsDB and the Governor-in-Council. The resultant delay only served to frustrate early provision of much needed improvements to the local living environment.

21. Mr Fong Loi stressed that, for years, Lamma residents had longed for early solutions to the pollution, sanitation and other problems which had thwarted further developments in Yung Shue Wan. These included the discharge of untreated sewage into the bay, the lack of facilities/space for proper disposal of construction wastes, for safe storage of dangerous goods, for up-to-standard emergency vehicular access and for the free flow of pedestrian movements not fettered by loading/unloading activities. The progressive deterioration of living conditions in Yung Shue Wan had been little helped by the gradual growth in population in recent years. Without the new land to be provided on the proposed reclamation, much of the badly needed infrastructural improvements such as the provision of proper drainage and sewage treatment facilities would not be possible. He criticised the relevant authorities as being less than alive to the aspirations that had been voiced by a majority of local residents. He recalled that, back in June 1994, a petition signed by more than six hundred local residents in support of the project was put to the Administration. Furthermore, he was given to understand that the Advisory Council on the Environment, having carefully examined the concerns raised by the green groups, found the Administration’s proposals environmentally acceptable. That being the case, he had difficulties in understanding why PWSC had chosen to stall a decision on the funding application. Mr Fong Loi then tabled the following motion :

"Designed as it is to provide much needed infrastructural improvements to the living environment in Yung Shue Wan, the proposed reclamation project has the support of most local residents. The Lamma (North) Rural Committee together with the elected DB member for Lamma, having consulted locals about the merits of the project, fully endorse its early implementation. Against the above background, the Islands District Board notes with concern the recent stalemate surrounding the voting of funds for the project and calls for prompt steps on the part of the relevant authorities to allow early commencement of works."

22. Mr Fong Kam-hung seconded the motion. He quoted examples to illustrate the extent to which the lack of proper infrastructure had hindered developments at Yung Shue Wan and the mounting grievance that this had brought about. He asserted that the size of the sanitary problems now obtaining was such that they could no longer be left unattended. Mr Fong went on to say that the relative merits of the project should be pretty self-evident if the relevant authorities took to their heart the interest of the long-time settlers in Yung Shue Wan (as opposed to those who treat Yung Shue Wan as a dormitory rather than their home). In his view, those who advocated preservation of the status quo (which included a heavily polluted shoreline) were doing a disservice to the cause of conservation.

23. Mr Kwong Kwok-wai supported the views of Messrs Fong Loi and Fong Kam-hung. It appeared that some LegCo Members did not have a full picture about the current state of the environment at Yung Shue Wan and thus failed to appreciate how badly the proposed reclamation and related infrastructure was needed to improve the situation.

24. Speaking as a Lamma resident, Mr Chow Yuk-tong criticised the relevant authorities for having allowed what was clearly an avoidable delay to creep into the decision making process. In his view, LegCo Members on the PWSC owed the long-time settlers in Yung Shue Wan a full explanation. If in choosing to stall a decision on the funding application, they had allowed the objections raised by the transient population at Yung Shue Wan to outweigh the ruling that had been made by the Governor-in-Council with due regard to the wider public interest, Mr Chow felt that the long-time settlers at Yung Shue Wan had been given a less than fair deal.

25. Given the lapse of time since the project was first put to IsDB in 1993, Mr Ip Cho-vin considered it disappointing that the way was not yet cleared for works to commence. He said that this particular case well illustrated one problem inherent in allocating LegCo seats solely on the basis of population size, namely that the legitimate interest of sparsely populated areas like Islands District might not always be fully attended to in LegCo.

26. Ms Chau Chuen-heung spoke in support of the motion proposed by Mr Fong Loi. Before the matter was taken any further, she suggested that a site visit be arranged for LegCo Members so that they could see for themselves the actual situation on the ground.

27. Mr Fong Loi’s motion was carried unanimously.

28. Mr Peter So thanked members for their views. To expedite matters, TDD had arranged a site visit for LegCo Members on Saturday 20 July 1996. At the coming site visit, the Administration would pinpoint the environmental problems now obtaining at Yung Shue Wan and explain to LegCo Members how the proposed project would help solve these problems without damaging the local ecology.

29. The Chairman thanked TDD for the presentation. He also paid tribute to the Islands District Management Committee for having brought this matter promptly to IsDB’s attention.

---

Enclosure 3 to PWSC(96-97)59

433CL - Yung Shue Wan development, engineering works -- Supplementary Information

Introduction

In discussing PWSC(96-97)4 on upgrading part of 433CL to Category A at the PWSC meeting held on 4 June 1996, Members generally supported the need to improve the basic infrastructure of Yung Shue Wan, however, they considered that the present design did not adequately address the concern about the preservation of the natural environment including the natural shoreline of Yung Shue Wan. They requested the Administration to review the present design and to provide more detailed information on the revisions made to the original plan in response to objections.

Revisions made to the original plan in response to objections

2. Before we submitted our proposal to the Public Works Subcommittee meeting on 4 June 1996, we had already revised the original plan to preserve, as far as practicable, the natural environment and the rural character of Yung Shue Wan in response to the objections received. We plan to construct a rubble mound seawall (instead of a smooth surface seawall as originally planned) for the reclamation of the sewage treatment plant site to facilitate recolonization of marine fauna. We had also included more comprehensive planting and landscaping works to ensure that the proposed reclamation will blend in well with the natural surrounding environment.

Review of the present design

3. On 20 July 1996, the Director of Territory Development held a joint site visit at Yung Shue Wan with some PWSC/FC Members of the Legislative Council and the representatives from Environmental Protection Department, Planning Department and Home Affairs Department. The LegCo Members present agreed the urgency of the phase 1 works to improve the environment of the area.

4. In response to comments made by some Members during the site visit, we will review the present design in the following aspects -

(a) Reinstating some form of sand or pebble beach

Upon our initial review, all of phase 1 seafront is either exposed or occupied for loading activities and is therefore not suitable for beach formation. However, a section of the promenade within the phase 2 seafront is within the inner bay area where formation of an artificial beach may be possible. The detailed layout is shown at the Annex (two sheets). We will carry out further studies on the current and tide conditions, etc. for beach formation in the detailed design stage of the phase 2 works.

(b) Providing more open spaces and community services

The Director of Planning will review the land use proposals of the phase 2 development area with a view to providing more open space and community facilities and also to exploring appropriate measures, such as landscaped barriers or other means, if required, for incorporation into the project to deter the illegal occupation of public area.

---