A cultural heritage impact assessment has been undertaken
to define the nature and scale of the potential impacts on cultural heritage resources
associated with the Project, with a specific focus on the effects in the
vicinity of sensitive receivers. An
archaeological survey and a historical buildings and structures survey were
conducted to establish the baseline cultural heritage conditions of the Study
Area. Both construction and operational
phase impacts have been assessed. Measures required to mitigate identified
impacts are recommended, where appropriate, to reduce residual impacts to
acceptable levels.
The following legislation and guidelines are applicable to
the cultural heritage assessment in
·
Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (Cap.
499.);
·
Technical Memorandum on the EIA Process, Annex
10 and 19 (EIAO TM);
·
Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53);
and
·
Section 2 of Annex 10 of the Technical Memorandum on the EIA Process (EIAO TM) defines the
technical scope of cultural heritage impact assessments. It states that the criteria for evaluating
impacts to sites of cultural heritage should include the following:
·
the general presumption in favour of the
protection and conservation of all sites of cultural heritage because they
provide an essential, finite and irreplaceable link between the past and the
future and are points of reference and identity for culture and tradition; and
·
adverse impacts on sites of cultural heritage
shall be kept to an absolute minimum.
The Antiquities and
Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53) (AM
Ordinance) provides statutory protection against the threat of development
on declared monuments, historical buildings and archaeological sites to enable
their preservation for posterity. The AM Ordinance also establishes statutory
procedures to be followed in making such a declaration.
In practice, the Antiquities and Monuments Office (AMO)
would identify deemed monuments and agreement would be reached with the owners
of the monuments to provide for specific measures to ensure preservation. Deemed monuments have the potential to be
upgraded to statutory declared monuments under the AM Ordinance.
A wide range of potential sites of cultural heritage,
among which are historical buildings and structures and archaeological sites,
have been identified and recorded by AMO in addition to those for which a
declaration has been made under the AM
Ordinance. Historic buildings and
structures are recorded by AMO according to the grading system shown in Table
8‑1.
Table 8‑1 Grading
of Historical Buildings
|
Grade |
|
Description |
|
I |
|
Buildings
of outstanding merit; every effort should be made to preserve if possible |
|
II |
|
Buildings
of special merit; effort should be made to selectively preserve |
|
III |
|
Buildings
of some merit, but not yet qualified for consideration as possible
monuments. These are to be recorded
and used as a pool for future selection |
It should be noted that the grading of historical
buildings is intended for AMO’s internal reference
only and has no statutory standing. Although there are no statutory provisions
for the protection of recorded archaeological sites and historical buildings
and features (including Graded, Deemed and recorded) in
Over the years, surveys have been undertaken to identify
archaeological sites in
Section 11 of
the AM Ordinance requires any person
who discovers an antiquity, or supposed antiquity, to report the discovery to
the Antiquities Authority. By
implication, construction projects need to ensure that the Antiquities
Authority is formally notified of archaeological resources, which are discovered
during project assessment or construction.
Chapter 10 HKPSG covers
planning considerations relevant to general guidelines and measures for
conservation of historical buildings, archaeological sites and other
antiquities.
The assessment has followed the criteria and guidelines
for evaluating and assessing impacts on sites of cultural heritage as set out
in Annexes 10 and 19 of the EIAO TM, and Section 3.5.6 of the EIA Study Brief (ESB-069/2001). To assess potential direct and indirect
impacts on sites of cultural heritage, the Study Area covers an area defined by
within a distance of 300 m from the boundary of the Preferred Option of the
drainage tunnel system.
The assessment comprises the tasks described in the
following sections.
A desktop search was undertaken to compile a comprehensive
inventory of recorded sites of cultural heritage within the Study Area. The search included the review of:
·
List of declared monuments protected by the AM Ordinance (Cap. 53);
·
Deemed monuments, graded buildings and list of
cultural heritage sites identified by the AMO;
·
Published and unpublished papers, records,
archival and historical documents through public libraries, archives, tertiary
institutions and other government departments such as old maps and aerial
photos held in the Lands Department.
Following Section
3.5.6 of the EIA Study Brief
(ESB-069/2001), the following cultural heritage resources within the Study
Area have been included:
·
all sites of archaeological interest;
·
all pre-1950 buildings and structures;
·
selected post-1950 buildings and structures of
high architectural and historical significance and interest; and
·
landscape features include sites of historical
events or providing a significant historical record or a setting for buildings
or monuments of architectural or archaeological importance, historic field
patterns, tracks and fishponds and cultural element such as fung
shui woodlands and clan grave.
As the Study Area has not been adequately studied before,
an archaeological survey and the historical buildings and structures survey
were undertaken to define the baseline cultural heritage resources within the
Study Area.
An archaeological survey was undertaken to obtain field
data to evaluate the archaeological interest and the extent to which it is
potentially impacted by the Project. An
options selection exercise was undertaken to arrive at a Preferred Option for
the drainage tunnel system comprising an approximately 5.13 km long tunnel,
between Kwai Chung and Yau Kom Tau (reduced from 5.35 km
during preliminary design) three intakes and an outfall structure. The scope of this survey is based on the
Preferred Option. The construction
activities would involve excavation works and therefore potential impact on
unknown archaeological deposits may be caused. The information obtained from
the survey is used to evaluate the potential cultural heritage impacts
associated with the Project.
The following scope of the survey was agreed with the AMO
prior to commencement of the field works:
·
fieldwalking at areas
that are considered to have potential;
·
conducting a minimum of 30 auger holes at regular
intervals to establish the horizontal and vertical spread of archaeological
deposits (see Table 8‑2); and
·
excavation of a minimum of 6 test pits (see Table
8‑2) measuring at least 1m x 1m or 1.5m x 1.5m to
determine the presence or absence of any archaeological deposits.
Table 8‑2 Archaeological
Fieldwork Requirements
|
Proposed Channels (Channel Code) |
Min. No.
of Auger Holes Required |
Min. No.
of Test Pits Required |
|
Outfall
O-1 |
10 |
2 |
|
Intake
I-1 |
0 |
0 |
|
Intake
I-2 |
10 |
2 |
|
Intake
I-3 (option 1) |
10 |
2 |
|
Intake
I-3 (option 2) |
0 |
0 |
|
Area
near Intake I-2 |
0 |
0 |
|
Area
near Intake I-3 |
0 |
0 |
|
Total |
30 |
6 |
The archaeological
survey was conducted by Arhaeo-Environments Ltd.
(AEL) during February and March 2004. A
total of 6 test pits and 30 auger holes were completed. The Archaeological Survey Report (ASR)
detailing the survey findings was
received from AEL in March 2004 (see Appendix
G).
A historical buildings and structures survey was also
conducted by AEL to identify all historical buildings and structures within the
Study Area. The Study Area covers the
area within a distance of 300m from the boundary of the Preferred Option of the
drainage tunnel system. Villages
surveyed included Wo Yi Hop, Sam Tung
Uk, Lo Wai, Sam Dip Tam,
San Tsuen, Fu Yung Shan, Kwong
Pan Tin and Yau Kom Tau. The survey
comprises a desktop research and fieldworks, which included oral interviews
with local residents and village representatives, and photographic records. The
detailed findings of the survey are summarised in the Built Heritage Impact
Assessment Report (BHIA) (see Appendix H).
Preservation in totality is taken as the first priority
and the assessment has taken into account the requirements described in Section 2.1 of Annex 10 and Section 2.6 to 2.14 of Annex 19 of the EIAO TM.
Direct and indirect impacts have been assessed and
appropriate mitigation measures are recommended, where necessary.
A comprehensive inventory of the cultural heritage resources
within the Study Area has been established through a desktop review
supplemented by an archaeological survey and a historical buildings and
features survey. The identified sites
are described below and the detailed findings are presented in Appendices G and H of this report.
No declared or recorded archaeological sites are
identified within the Study Area.
Based on the findings of the archaeological field survey
undertaken for this Study, most of the proposed drainage works and potentially
impacted areas are located within the recent alluvial and colluvial
areas and no archaeological interest has been identified within the Study Area.
Intake I-1 is in a heavily disturbed area and no
archaeological potential exist. For this
reason, no field survey is necessary in accordance with the scope of fieldwork
agreed with AMO.
Intake I-2 is located at the confluence of two streams
near Lo Wai (see Figure 8.1). Two test pits measured 1m x 1m and 10 auger
holes were undertaken in this area. No
artefacts were found from fieldwalking survey, auger
holes and TP2. Four pottery and
porcelain shards dated 19th to 20th century were
recovered in TP1 approximately 10 m west of Lo Wai
River (see Section 8 of the ASR in Appendix
G). Considering their close
proximity to the rivers and the similarities in their characteristics compared
with village ware of present day, these recovered shards should be regarded as
secondary deposit with very little significance.
Intake I-3 is located on the moderate to steep cultivated
slope at the confluence of two rivers (see Figure 8.1). Fieldwalking, two
test pits TP1 and TP2 measured 1m x 1m and 10 auger holes were undertaken on
the terraces and steep terrain (see Intake I-3 of the ASR in Appendix E). No artefacts were found during fieldwalking survey or within any of auger holes and test
pits.
Outfall area O-1 is located on the moderate to steep
slopes at Yau Kom Tau facing southeast (see Figure 8.1). Fieldwalking survey, two test pits measured 1m x 1m
respectively and 10 hand auger holes were conducted in this area. No artefacts were found during fieldwalking survey or within any of auger holes and test
pits.
The Study Area includes a number of village settlements as
shown in Figure 8.1. No deemed monument or declared monument has
been identified within the Study Area.
Two graded buildings are listed in Section 3.5.6.3 of the
EIA Study Brief (ESB 069/2001) namely Chuk Lam Sim Yuen and Po Kwong Yuen
Monastery. Both sites are Grade III
historic building.
Chuk Lam Sim
Yuen (AMO ref. code AM940608) at Fu Yung Shan falls outside the 300 m Study
Area boundary (see Figure 8.2),
and therefore no survey was carried out on this monastery.
Po Kwong Yuen Monastery (AMO
ref. code AM940609) is located within the Study Area (see Figure 8.1) on Lo Wai Road at an
approximate distance of 109 m away from the proposed drainage tunnel
system. The Monastery was constructed in
1926 and is currently a Grade III building.
The main building is of three-hall type with three doors. The Chinese name ‘Po Kwong
Yuen’ is carved on a wooden plaque hanging on top of the main entrance. The main hall is the Buddha worshipping area,
while the hall to the left is used for ancestor worship.
In addition to graded historic buildings, 86 potential
historical buildings and structures are identified within the Study Area. They are summarised in Table
8‑3 and a detailed description of the sites and
photographic records are presented in BHIA in Appendix H.
Table 8‑3 Potential Historical Buildings and Features Identified within the Study
Area
|
Location |
Description |
Number of
Identified Potential Historical Buildings and Features |
Approximate
Distance From the Drainage Tunnel Scheme (m) (1) |
Detailed
Location of Buildings (see Appendix H) |
|
Wo Yi
Hop |
Wo Yi Hop village is located northeast of Tsuen Wan. The
village was established by the Lau’s clan in the 18th
century. It is known that the present
Lau residents are the 25th generation of the Lau’s clan. There are 7 historical buildings/structures
including an ancestral hall and old village houses identified. |
7 |
333 from Intake I-1 |
Plate 1 |
|
Sam
Tung Uk |
Sam Tung
Uk village was established by the Chan’s clan in
the 18th century. In 1980s,
due to the MTR development, the entire village was relocated to its present
site. The village at its old days can
still be seen in the Sam Tung Uk
museum. There are 2 historical
buildings/structures including ancestral hall and rural committee house identified. |
2 |
105 |
Plate 5 |
|
Lo
Wai |
Lo Wai
is situated on the slope of Tai Mo Shan mountain. The village was founded in the late 17th
century and occupied by the Cheungs, Tsings, Tangs, Huis and Wongs. It is believed
that the village was purposely built on the mountain slope to avoid piracy
along the coastal area. An extensive
list of 48 village houses and monasteries at Lo Wai
was supplied by AMO as part of the BHIA brief for the project. However, most of these houses are in ruins
or with little of their original appearance retained. Apart from the monasteries which are of
cultural importance, the village houses offer very little of special note. In addition, there are an ancestral hall, a
public school and 2 monasteries identified as potential historical building
and structure. |
52 |
25 |
Plate 9 |
|
Sam
Dip Tam |
Sam Dip Tam area is formed
by three successive rocky platforms, one higher than the other. Each platform forms a lake, thus, the area is
called ‘Sam Dip Tam’ which means 'Three Successive Lakes’ in Chinese. The
peaceful environment provided a good setting for aged home and Buddhist
monasteries. There are 13 historical
buildings and structures including a rock carving, a grave, an aged home, 3
bridges, 7 monasteries and nunneries identified. |
13 |
0-120 |
Plate 30 |
|
San
Tsuen |
San Tsuen
is situated west of Lo Wai village. The village was established by the Sun’s
clan and the Diu’s clan in the late 19th
century. Most of the old village houses were demolished and rebuilt into new
western style three-storey buildings. There are 5 historical buildings and
structures from the 19th century including 2 ancestral halls and 3
old village houses identified. |
5 |
308 |
Plate 38 |
|
Fu
Yung Shan |
Fu Yung Shan is situated
on a small hill west of Lo Wai village. In the early 20th century, many
abbots came and settled in this area. Monasteries and nunneries were
established to preach Buddhism. There
are 3 historical buildings and structures including a monastery and 2 abbot’s
memorial halls identified. |
3 |
154 |
Plate 41 |
|
Kwong
Pan Tin Village |
Kwong Pan Tin village is formed by Kwong
Pan Tin Upper village and Kwong Pan Tin Lower
village. It situates west of Tsuen Wan. The entire
village is occupied with temporary squatters whom built temporary structures
with wood and stone. Only 1 temple of
cultural significance has been identified. |
1 |
73 |
Plate 47 |
|
Yau Kom Tau Village |
Yau Kom Tau
village originally situated in where the present Nam Fung
Centre is. In 1984, the entire village
was re-sited to west of Tsuen Wan due to the
development of the MTR. There are 3
historical buildings and structures including an ancestral hall, a rural
committee house, a temple and an earthshine identified. |
4 |
0 horizontal distance as the drainage tunnel is
located beneth one of the identified buildings. |
Plate 60 |
|
Note: (1) Distance measured from
the closest historical buildings or structures to the Preferred Option of the
drainage tunnel system alignment works area boundary. The distance is measured horizontally. |
||||
No declared and recorded archaeological sites or archaeological
potential areas were identified from both records and field investigations
within the Study Area. The construction of the Preferred Option of the drainage
alignment will not impact on areas of archaeological interest. No further
archaeological investigations will be required.
No deemed or declared monuments identified within the
Study Area. One of the two Grade III
buildings, Chuk Lam Sim
Yuen, is outside the 300 m Study Area and the other one, Po Kwong
Yuen Monastery, is located at approximately 109 m from the Preferred Option of
the drainage tunnel system. No impact is
therefore expected due to the large separation distance.
All identified potential historical buildings and features
in Wo Yi Hop, Sam Tung Uk, San Tsuen, Fu Yung Shan and Kwong Pan Tin village settlement areas as shown in Table 3
will not be impacted as they fall over 70 m from the Preferred Option of the
drainage tunnel system. However,
potential impact on some of the identified historical buildings and structures
in Lo Wai, Sam Dip Tam and Yau
Kom Tau settlement area may
be a concern.
At Lo Wai, there are 52
potential historical buildings/structures and all of them will not be directly
impacted. Except Kuen
Yuen Tung Monastery, all these buildings are located
at more than 50 m from the drainage tunnel alignment. Kuen Yuen Tung Monastery is located at approximately 24 m in
horizontal distance from the drainage tunnel at an elevation of 107-120 mPD level (the tunnel alignment will be at approximately 68
mPD). The
radial distance of the monastery from the tunnel alignment is 46-57 m. Potential vibration from tunnel boring may be
a concern to the monastery buildings.
At Sam Dip Tam, 13 historical buildings and structures are
identified. No sites falls within the
works boundary, and therefore no direct impact is expected. However, as the sites are located in
proximity to the works area of Intake I-2, potential construction noise and
dust emission impact to the users of the historical buildings and structures
may be a concern. The air quality and
noise assessments are presented in other sections of this EIA report for
details please refer to Sections 3
and 4 respectively. Vibration from blasting and rock-breaking
activities during the construction of Intake I-2 may also be a potential
concern. Further details are presented
in Table
8‑4.
Table 8‑4 Separation
Distances of Historical Buildings and Structures from Construction Activities
at Sam Dip Tam
|
Site Name |
Ground
Level of the Site (mPD) |
Horizontal
Distance from Drainage Tunnel (m) |
Approximate
Radial Distance from the Drainage Tunnel (m) |
Approximate Distance from works area
of Intake I-2 (m) |
|
The Yuen Yuen Institute |
127 |
100 |
N/A |
93 |
|
Western
Monastery |
120 |
70 |
N/A |
47 |
|
Yuen
Yuen Home for the Aged |
120 |
70 |
70 |
28 |
|
Hong
Hoi Chee Hong Temple |
93 |
30 |
48 |
Immediately adjacent to Intake I-2 |
|
Chiu
Yum Tsing Yuen |
94 |
70 |
N/A |
19 |
|
Tse’s
Grave |
105 |
58 |
N/A |
35 |
|
Wan
Lin Bridge |
97 |
63 |
N/A |
Immediately adjacent to Intake I-2 |
|
“No
name” Bridge |
90 |
105 |
N/A |
58 |
|
Tin
Lung Bridge |
82 |
163 |
N/A |
116 |
|
Wai
Yuen |
133 |
70 |
N/A |
116 |
|
Sam
Dip Tam Rock Carving |
96 |
98 |
N/A |
35 |
|
Tung
Kwok Monastery |
96 |
112 |
N/A |
51 |
|
Fat
Kwong Tsing She |
84 |
105 |
N/A |
111 |
For the purpose of this assessment, reference has been
drawn from Geoguide4 (2), which indicates as a general guide that blast
vibrations from sub-surface works are normally not potentially damaging to
structures at distances of more than 50 m and only exceptionally at
distances of more than 100 m. As indicated in Table
8‑4, potential vibration impact to the Yuen Yuen Institute, a “no name” bridge, Tin Lung Bridge, Wai Yuen and Tung Kwok Monastery
and Fat Kwok Tsing She is considered minimal as they
are located over 50 m from the works area of Intake I-2 or the drainage tunnel
(Figure 8.2).
However, the Western Monastery, Yuen Yuen
Home for the Aged, Hong Hoi Chee Hong Temple, Chiu
Yum Tsing Yuen, Tse’s
Grave, Wan Lin Bridge and Sam Dip Tam Rock Carving may potentially be impacted
by vibration from the construction of Intake I-2 as they are located within 50
m (see Table
8‑4) of the proposed construction activities (Figure 8.2).
At Yau Kom
Tau, four historical buildings are identified. The drainage tunnel will be constructed at
approximately 40 mPD, potential vibration impact due
to the construction activities may be a concern. Further details are shown in Table
8‑5.
Table 8‑5 Separation
Distances of Historial Buildings and Structures from
Construction Activities at Yau Kom
Tau
|
Site Name |
Ground
Level of the Site (mPD) |
Horizontal
Distance from Drainage Tunnel (m) |
Approximate
Radial Distance from the Drainage Tunnel (m) |
|
Tin
Hau Temple |
79 |
0 |
39 |
|
Yam
Kom Tau Village Rural
Committee |
78 |
12 |
40 |
|
Yeung’s
Ancestral Hall |
80 |
21 |
45 |
|
The Yau Kom Tau Village “Pai Fong” |
72 |
65 |
72 |
As shown in Table 8‑5, the Tin Hau Temple,
Yam Kom Tau Village Rural
Committee and the Yeung’s Ancestral Hall fall within
50 m of the proposed construction activities, potential vibration impact may be
a concern. Potential vibration impact to
the Yau Kom Tau Village “Pai Fong” is
considered minimal due to the large separation distance (Figure 8.3).
The operation of the proposed drainage scheme will only
involve interception of stormwater from upland
catchments via the three proposed intakes and therefore no operational impact
on cultural heritage is envisaged.
As no impacts on recorded archaeological sites or area
with archaeological potential were identified within the Study Area, no
mitigation measure for archaeological resources is considered necessary.
The construction methods to be employed should seek to
avoid potential vibration impacts to Kuen Yuen Tung Monastery at Lo Wai, the
Western Monastery, Yuen Yuen Home for the Aged, Hong
Hoi Chee Hong Temple, Chiu Yum Tsing
Yuen, Tse’s Grave, Wan Lin Bridge and Sam Dip Tam
Rock Carving in Sam Dip Tam and the Tin Hau Temple,
Yam Kom Tau Village Rural
Committee and the Yeung’s Ancestral Hall in Yau Kom Tau
as these sites fall within 50 m of the Preferred Option of the drainage tunnel
alignment or associated Intakes/Outfall construction activities. Construction works that generates excessive
vibration in close proximity to these sites should be restricted to protect the
building from adverse vibration impacts and to ensure that the building
structures will not be damaged as a result of these impacts.
In order to ensure that no structural or superficial
damage will be caused by the construction activities, a precautionary approach
involving a pre-construction condition survey and establishment of appropriate
vibration limits for the potentially impacted structures should be
adopted. Protection measures for the
potentially impacted structures, if considered necessary from the
pre-construction condition survey, should be implemented prior to the
commencement of construction works. Vibration monitoring during the
construction phase should be undertaken as part of the EM& A programme.
With the implementation of the mitigation measures recommended
in the previous section, no residual impacts are expected.
Baseline and vibration impact monitoring should be
undertaken in the proximity of the potentially impacted sites at Lo Wai, Sam Dip Tam and Yau Kom Tau to ensure the performance
meets with the vibration criteria to be discussed and agreed with AMO.
A literature review
supplemented by an archaeological investigation identified no sites of archaeological
significance in the Study Area. No mitigation
measures for archaeological resources are considered necessary.
One Grade III building (Po Kwong
Yuen Monastery at Lo Wai) and 86 historical buildings
and structures were identified within the Study Area during the built heritage
survey. Most of the identified sites
except a few sites at Lo Wai, Sam Dip Tam and Yau Kom Tau
settlement areas are located over 70 m from the Preferred Option of the
drainage tunnel alignment and the associated Intakes/Outfall construction
activities.
Potential vibration impact on a number of historical
buildings and structures at Lo Wai, Sam Dip Tam and Yau Kom Tau
has been identified in Section 8.5.2
and appropriate mitigation measures have been recommended including the
adoption of construction methods that minimises generation of excessive
vibration, a pre-construction survey to establish the existing condition of the
potentially affected buildings and vibration monitoring as part of the EM&A
programme.
(1)
Administrative procedures are adopted by AMO with the intention to
protect sites of archaeological and historical interests that are not protected
under the provisions of AM Ordinance. For example, reserve area may be imposed
on a particular area or building consultation with AMO for advice when
development within the reserve area is proposed. These AMO measures are
referred to as administrative procedures.
(2)
Geoguide 4: Guide to Cavern Engineering, GEO, Civil
Engineering Department, HKSAR Government (1998).