The Advisory Council on Environment discusses Additional Information prepared for environmental impact assessment report on partial development of Fanling Golf Course site
******************************************************************************************
The following is issued on behalf of the Advisory Council on the Environment:
The Advisory Council on the Environment (ACE) held a meeting today (May 3) and discussed the Additional Information prepared for the environmental impact assessment (EIA) report on Technical Study on Partial Development of Fanling Golf Course Site – Feasibility Study (the Study).
At its meeting held on August 19, 2022, the ACE decided that the EIA report on the Study would neither be endorsed nor rejected after two rounds of voting and detailed discussion, but the project proponent (i.e. the Civil Engineering and Development Department) would be required to provide Additional Information to the Director of Environmental Protection (DEP). On August 24, 2022, the ACE issued its comments on the EIA report to the DEP in accordance with the EIA process stipulated under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance and advised that the project proponent should submit Additional Information on eight key topics for the DEP’s consideration to facilitate his final decision on whether to approve the EIA report.
The project proponent submitted a draft document on the Additional Information to the ACE on April 18, 2023. At today’s meeting, the project proponent reported the content of the draft Additional Information and sought the ACE’s comments on it.
After listening to the report of project proponent, members unanimously considered that six out of the eight key topics of the Additional Information, namely conducting an additional bird survey for seven months and an additional moth survey for two months; providing further details of the bat survey; formulating tree compensation and management plans; submitting detailed analysis on the hydrological impact and the shading impact of the proposed housing blocks to the trees were in general sufficient to establish the conclusion of the EIA report.
As for the other two key topics of the Additional Information, namely a detailed layout plan of the proposed housing development and information on how the grave situated in Sub-Area 1 should be handled, members agreed that the project proponent has not fully addressed the concern of the ACE. The ACE held the view that in case DEP decides to approve the EIA report, he should consider imposing a condition to request the project proponent to amend the detailed housing development layout plan to entail the preservation of the existing around 0.4 hectares of woodland. The ACE noted that the project proponent is in contact with affected descendent and the matter should be discussed and followed up between the two parties. The ACE will provide written comments to the project proponent in due course.
