TNAG-2145-FCO40-3064-Hong-Kong-Port-and-Airport-Development-Strategy-(PADS)-1990 — Page 62

this investment is essential for generating the wealth which is nec- essary to meet the hopes and aspira- tions of our community.

***

Secretary for Economic Services, Mrs. Anson Chan

In order to understand why the Port and Airport Development Strategy is the right solution, we must first seek to understand the problem. The problem is that ac- cording to modest rates of growth, both our port and our airport will reach capacity within the next 6 years or sooner, unless we take steps to provide for their expansion. It is important to remember that our strategy is designed to address both port and airport growth. If the problems were different, then the chosen strategy might well have been different. Of the forty or so devel- opment strategies considered, it was that based on an airport at Chek Lap Kok and port expansion on Lantau which performed best against five key tests of -

First, economic performance, that is its contribution to Hong Kong's long term and continued cconomic growth.

Secondly, environmental and social impact, that is its effect on the qual- ity of the physical, living and work- ing environment;

Thirdly, programming, that is its amenability to implementation in incremental stages according to demand;

Fourthly, flexibility and robustness, that is its ability to cope with vari-

ations in future demands; and

Fifthly, financial performance, that is its ability to provide an optimal balance of participation by the public and private sectors and the optimal implementation of works in view of financial constraints.

2. Well before the problem was redefined to include the port, we had, since the early 1970's, been seeking to identify the best site for a replacement airport. In 1973, the original Air Transport System Long Term Planning Investigation stud- ied an initial list of 30 sites, which was subsequently reduced, by stages, to a shortlist of six. The six were -

Tolo channel at the extrance to Tolo Harbour in the Eastern New Terri- tories;

A reclamation site to the west of Lamma Island;

A reclamation site to the east of Cheung Chau;

A reclamation site off Nim Wan in Deep Bay, offshore and to the north of Block Point;

A reclamation site in the Shum Chun River Delta, adjacent to the border; and, lastly,

Chek Lap Kok.

3.

The Chek Lap Kok site was selected as the preferred option and a feasibility study of it was under- taken in 1979 followed by a full Master Plan Study in 1982. With the exception of the Tolo channel site which was rejected in 1973 because of its poor operational characteristics and its adverse envi- ronmental impact on water quality in Tolo Harbour, all the other sites have subsequently been reviewed again. The Western Harbour sites in the area of Lamma and Cheung Chau Islands were reconsidered in the Alternative Replacement Air- port Sites Study in 1989. The best site in that area was then compared with the Chek Lap Kok site during

the PADS study which completed its work later that year. In 1981-83, while a master plan for Chek Lap Kok was being prepared, the Deep Bay sites and, in particular, the more attractive site of Nim Wan were also re-examined but found to be less desirable than Chek Lap Kok. The Nim Wan site was also recom- mended to Government in a report prepared by group of Hong Kong academics this year. This prompted us to look yet again at that site. But this report and the subsequent re- view only reconfirmed our belief that Chek Lap Kok was the correct choice.

4.

The problems with Nim Wan are many and serious and those recommending the site have not suggested how they might be over- come. The site is so close to the new Shenzhen airport under develop- ment that airspace co-ordination would be very complex; an airport at Nim Wan would create serious conflicts with a very important ship- ping channel serving the Pearl River, aircraft noise from such an airport would adversely affect residential areas in Shenzhen and Tin Shui Wai; the proximity of the Mai Po Marshes would cause a serious risk of bird strike for aircraft; the site would not allow for port expansion to share the new transport links required for the airport; and the delicate ecol- ogy of Deep Bay could also be seri- ously harmed.

5.

We acknowledge that Chek Lap Kok may not be the best site aeronautically taking South China as a whole, but it is, nevertheless, the best site in terms of resolving the complex problem we are facing, Our problem is not one simply of air traffic growth and difficult ter- rain. This over-simplification of the problem has led some to suggest we should think solely in terms of siting an airport somewhere on the Chinese side of the border where terrain constraints are less prob- lematic to serve the Pearl River Delta as a whole. This suggestion misses the point that the airport is needed primarily to serve Hong Kong and the future Special Administrative