11b.2 Environmental Legislation and Standards
11b.2.1.1 Legislation, Standards and Guidelines that are relevant to the consideration of Cultural Heritage impacts under this study include the following:
· Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO);
· Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM);
· Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (A&MO);
·
· Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment (GCHIA);
· Guidelines for Marine Archaeological Investigation (GMAI).
11b.2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (Cap.499) (EIAO)
11b.2.2.1 Schedule 1 of the EIAO defines “Sites of Cultural Heritage” as “an antiquity or monument, whether being a place, building, site or structure or a relic, as defined in the Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance and any place, building, site, or structure or a relic identified by the Antiquities and Monuments Office (AMO) to be of archaeological, historical or paleontological significance”.
11b.2.3 Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM)
11b.2.3.1 The criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing impacts are listed in Annexes 10 and 19 of the EIAO-TM respectively. The criteria for evaluating impact on sites of cultural heritage include:
· 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.
11b.2.4 Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap.53) (A&MO)
11b.2.4.1 The A&MO (the Ordinance) provides the statutory framework for the preservation of objects of historical, archaeological and paleontological interest.
11b.2.4.2 The Ordinance contains the statutory procedures for the Declaration of Monuments. Under the Ordinance, a monument means a place, building, site or structure which is declared to be a monument, historical building, archaeological or paleontological site or structure because of its historical, archaeological or paleontological significance under Section 3 of the Ordinance.
11b.2.4.3 Under Section 6 and subject to Subsection (4) of the Ordinance, the following acts are prohibited in relation to monuments, except under permit granted by the Antiquities Authority.
· To excavate, carry on building works, plant or fell trees or deposit earth or refuse on or in a proposed monument or monument; or
· To demolish, remove, obstruct, deface or interfere with a proposed monument or monument.
11b.2.4.4
The discovery of an Antiquity,
as defined in the Ordinance, must be reported to the Antiquities Authority, or
a designated person. The Ordinance also provides that, the ownership of every
relic discovered in
11b.2.4.5 No archaeological excavation can be carried out by any person, other than the Authority and the designated person, without a licence issued by the Authority. A licence will only be issued if the Authority is satisfied that the applicant has sufficient scientific training or experience to enable him to carry out the excavation and search satisfactorily, is able to conduct, or arrange for, a proper scientific study of any antiquities discovered as a result of the excavation and search, and has sufficient staff and financial support.
11b.2.5
11b.2.5.1
Chapter 10 of HKPSG covers
planning considerations relevant to conservation. It also details the
principles of conservation, the conservation of natural landscape and habitats,
historic buildings and archaeological sites, and addresses the issue of
enforcement. The appendices list the legislation and administrative controls
for conservation, other conservation related measures in
11b.2.6 Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
11b.2.6.1 The GCHIA is attached in Appendix C of the EIA Study Brief No. ESB-184/2008 (ESB) covering baseline study, field evaluation, impact assessment and mitigation measures.
11b.2.7 Guidelines for Marine Archaeological Impact Assessment
11b.2.7.1
The GMAI details the standard practice, procedures and methodology, as
well as a review of archaeological potential, geophysical surveys, diver
inspections and assessment criteria for marine archaeological impact assessment.
11b.3.1.1
The study area covers an area
that stretches
11b.3.1.2
The baseline condition of
cultural heritage has been established through a literature review and field
surveys.
11b.3.2 Terrestrial Archaeology
11b.3.2.1 With reference to the EIA Study Brief and the GCHIA, an archaeological desktop research and a site visit has been undertaken to examine records and interpret archaeological resources within the study area. The archaeological impact assessment was conducted in accordance with the GCHIA.
11b.3.2.2
Desktop research was conducted
to collect available and relevant information of previous archaeological,
historic, geographic and geological studies related to the study area where
excavation works had been conducted.
11b.3.3.1
The Marine Archaeological Investigation (MAI) follows the methodology
set out in the GMAI issued by AMO and the relevant requirements in the
Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM,
Annexes 10 and 19).
11b.3.3.2
The study scope is shown on Figure 11b.1 and consists
of the following two areas:
· Reclamation area - the location for the IWMF, and
·
Breakwater and cable corridor -
the location of proposed breakwater for the IWMF site and the location of the submarine
cables at the seabed between Shek Kwu Chau and
11b.3.3.3 The MAI for Shek Kwu Chau consists of the following five separate tasks:-
· Phase 1 – assess the archaeological potential of the two study areas from the results of a Baseline Review;
· Phase 2 – conduct marine Geophysical Surveys to obtain detailed data about the seabed and sub surface sediments;
· Phase 3 – through data interpretation identify and assess the location of seabed features with archaeological potential; and
· Phase 4 – carry out a diver survey to inspect unidentified objects on the seabed to establish their archaeological value.
· Phase 5 - Assess the impact of the construction of the IWMF on archaeological resources, if present, and recommend a mitigation strategy, if necessary.
11b.3.4.1
With reference to the GCHIA, features
which fall within the scope of built heritage survey include:
· all pre-1950 buildings and structures
· selected post – 1950 buildings and structures of high architectural and historical significance and interest; and
· cultural landscapes including places associated with historic events, activities, persons or exhibiting other cultural or aesthetic values, such as sacred religious sites, battlefields, a setting for buildings or structures of architectural or archaeological importance, historic field patterns, clan graves, old tracks, feng shui woodlands and ponds, etc.
11b.3.4.2 In this assessment, the cultural significance of built heritage and archaeological interest have been assessed so as to establish a baseline condition for the identification of the potential impact arising from the proposed construction works as well as to recommend the corresponding mitigation measures. With reference to the Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance of 1999 (The Burra Charter) issued by the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) of United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), cultural significance means aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value.
11b.3.4.3 Cultural and historical landscapes assessed in this baseline study include places associated with a historic event, activity, or person or exhibiting other cultural or aesthetic values, including:
· sacred religious sites;
· battlefields;
· a setting for buildings or structures of architectural or archaeological importance;
· historic field patterns;
· historic graves and foundation stones which are associated with historic figure or act as an important symbolic or visual landmark of a community; and
· old tracks and ponds.
11b.3.4.4
Desktop literature review and
site survey were conducted. The
following information has been analyzed, collected and collated to determine
the presence of historical occupation in the project area and to assess the
potential existence of cultural heritage within the potential impacted area:
· Background information (e.g. AMO’s files, Public Records Office, map libraries, university and public libraries, published and unpublished government and non-government documents, cartographic and pictorial documents) of heritage sites (including declared monuments, government historic sites, sites of archaeological interest and graded historic buildings identified by AMO) within and in close proximity to the study area;
· Areas proposed for construction and operation activities and potential impacts induced by the project;
· Previous recorded cultural heritage resources within the project boundary; and
· AMO’s 1,444 newly proposed historic buildings with their existing and respective proposed grading.
11b.3.4.5 Field surveys was conducted with the following tasks:
· Recording of identified built heritage features;
· Interviews with local informants, residents and elders, if necessary. The interviews aim at gathering information, such as cultural and historical background of the buildings and structures, as well as historical events associated with the built heritage features; and
· Systematic documentation of all recorded features including:
· Photographic records of historic buildings or structures including the exterior where possible;
· A set of 1:1000 scale maps showing the location and boundary of each historic building, boundary stone, monument object, historic grave, and cultural landscape;
· Written descriptions of recorded features of historic buildings, e.g. age of the building or structure, architectural features, condition of the building or structure, past and present uses, notes on any modifications, direction faced and associations with historical or cultural events or individuals; and
· Written descriptions of recorded features of historic graves or foundation stones, boundary stones if any, a copy of the inscription of stone table, and architectural elements of the graves or stones where possible.
11b.4 Result of Terrestrial Archaeological Review
11b.4.1.1
A site visit was conducted for the study area
by in-house archaeologist and revealed no artefacts.
11b.4.1.2
As described in Section 2,
submarine cables would be laid across the water between the artificial island
near SKC and
11b.5 Result of Marine Archaeological Investigation Review
Introduction
11b.5.1.1 A Baseline Review was undertaken to compile a comprehensive inventory of cultural heritage resources for both the reclamation area, breakwater and cable corridor. The Review established the historical profile and potential for cultural heritage sites and included:
·
Marine charts records held in
the UK Hydrographic Office, and National Maritime Museum Library in
· Publications on local historical, architectural, anthropological, archaeological and other cultural studies;
· Unpublished papers, records, archival and historical documents held in local libraries and other government departments.
11b.5.1.2
Practically nothing is known about the archaeological potential of the
seabed deposits in
Maritime Activity in the Vicinity of Shek Kwu Chau
11b.5.1.3
Shek Kwu Chau is a small island
11b.5.1.4
The grave is for Elizabeth Ann
McIntyre, who died at sea on the 21st of October 1845. Her husband was master
of the ship “Castle Huntly”. The “Castle
Huntly” was a three-masted wooden caravel of thirteen hundred tons, built at the
11b.5.1.5
The presence of the historic
grave on Shek Kwu Chau indicates the island’s important location within the
main shipping route towards
11b.5.1.6
There is no other documentary
evidence to indicate specific maritime activity around Shek Kwu Chau. However,
it is less than two miles from Cheung Chau which was the haunt of a large
pirate band under the command of Cheung Po, also and more popularly known as
Cheung Po-Tsai. In 1808 he fought against the Ch’ing Government’s Navy several
times and was victorious on every occasion. His band repeatedly raided villages
in the San Hui, Panyu and San On Counties. Cheung’s forces and influence
rapidly grew. At one time he had over 270 vessels, 7,000 swords, 1,200 guns and
16,000 men working under him (
11b.5.1.7
Throughout coastal southern
11b.5.1.8
There is further documentary
evidence from the records of the Chinese Customs Station at Cheung Chau. L.C.
Arlington of the Chinese Maritime Customs, who spent six years (1893-9) in
charge of the Customs Station at Cheung Chau, wrote in his autobiography: 'During my time in
11b.5.1.9
The bay at
11b.5.1.10 The UK Hydrographic Office (UKHO) holds a database of surveyed
shipwrecks in
11b.5.1.11 The UKHO holds a British navigation chart of the study areas from
1899 (Figure 11b.2) which
interestingly shows a wreck south east of
Introduction
11b.5.2.1
In order to establish the
potential of marine archaeology of the proposed reclamation area, breakwater and
submarine cable corridor for the IWMF, geophysical survey was arranged in two phases.
The Phase 1 survey, which covered the reclamation area, was completed in
June 2009; while the Phase 2 survey, which covered the breakwater and submarine
cable corridor area, was conducted in May/June 2010. Both surveys followed the same
methodology and were undertaken by the GEO Term Contractor. The results are included
into this report.
11b.5.2.2
During the geophysical surveys,
the following techniques was adopted:-
· Marine side scan sonar survey - To find objects on or above the seabed with archaeological potential
· Marine seismic profiling survey - To establish the geological succession over the survey area and locate buried objects
· Echo sounding and swath survey - To measure sea bed levels in detail and map anomalous features
11b.5.2.3 The results of the geophysical surveys have been presented in the following summary charts enclosed in Appendix 11b.2:-
· Echo Sounding and Swath Bathymetry Track Plots
· Seismic and Side Scan Sonar Track Plots
· Colour Contoured Swath Bathymetry Plans
· Sea Bed Features and Cable Alignments
· Contoured Levels at the Base of Marine Deposits
·
Contoured Levels on Top of Rock
in Any State of
· Contoured Levels on Top of Presumed Moderately Decomposed Rock
· Isopachs of Marine Deposits
· Isopachs of Alluvium
·
Isopachs of Rock in Any State
of
11b.5.2.4 The survey area is mainly covered with soft and fine sediments with numerous trawl scars. Rock outcrops were recorded close to the shore.
11b.5.2.5 Six sonar contacts were identified. The details of each one are listed in Table 11b.1 below. The location of each contact is presented on Figure 11b.3, and the images of the sonar contacts are enclosed in Appendix 11b.2.
Table 11b.1 Sonar Contact List
|
Contact Number |
Easting |
Northing |
Dimensions (m) |
Description |
|
Phase 1 Geophysical Survey – Reclamation
Area |
||||
|
WH2-SC |
816663.7E |
805744.9N |
2.4x0.9 |
Unidentified Object |
|
WH2-SC |
816665.6E |
805743.5N |
1.3
x0.6 |
Unidentified
Object |
|
WH2-SC |
816668.6E |
805742.0N |
1.6x0.7 |
Unidentified
Object |
|
WH2-SC |
816672.4E |
805740.3N |
1.9x1.2 |
Unidentified
Object |
|
WH2-SC |
816971.3E |
805443.5N |
3.2x1.0x0.3 |
Unidentified
Object |
|
Phase 2 Geophysical Survey – Breakwater &
Submarine Cable Corridor |
||||
|
WH2-SC001B |
816236.2E |
805443.5N |
3.5x1.2x0.4 |
Unidentified
Object |
11b.5.2.6 The thickness of the Marine Deposits in generally low close to the rock outcrop area and gets thicker away from the shore.
11b.5.2.7 Six unidentified objects were located buried in the Marine Deposit. The details are listed in Table 11b.2 below. The location of each contact is presented on Figure 11b.3, and the images of the seismic contacts are enclosed in Appendix 11b.2.
Table 11b.2 Seismic Contact List
|
Contact Number |
Easting |
Northing |
Description |
|
Phase 1 Geophysical Survey – Reclamation
Area |
|||
|
WH2-SEI |
816842.4E |
805576.3N |
Unidentified Object, |
|
WH2-SEI |
816898.2E |
805456.1N |
Unidentified Object, |
|
Phase 2 Geophysical Survey – Breakwater
& Submarine Cable Corridor |
|||
|
WH2-SEI001B |
815657.6E |
806596.2N |
Unidentified Object, |
|
WH2-SEI002B |
816309.9E |
805315.1N |
Unidentified Object, |
|
WH2-SEI003B |
816163.9E |
805467.6N |
Unidentified Object, |
|
WH2-SEI004B |
816324.1E |
805369.4N |
Unidentified Object, |
11b.5.2.8
Alluvium is missing near the
shore and mainly appears in the south east half of the survey area. The surface of the Alluvium is varying
and reaches to below
11b.5.2.9
The most obvious features on
the sounding plan are the rock outcrops located near the shore. The rock outcrops are generally more
than
11b.5.2.10 The seabed in the survey area is generally flat and deepening towards the south with depths between -1.0mPD close to the shore and -16.9mPD.
11b.5.2.11
The geophysical surveys located
a total of twelve unidentified objects in the survey area. The positions of the
unidentified objects were plotted in the proposed layout plan of the IWMF
development and the proposed alignment of the submarine cables. It was found
that the proposed reclamation and submarine cables would have direct impact to
the unidentified objects. As two
seismic contacts (WH2-SEI002B & WH2-SEI003B), which are located in the submarine
cable corridor, are located at
11b.5.2.12
For the remaining seven
unidentified objects (WH2-SC
11b.5.3.1
A diver survey was carried out in
February 2010 to locate the seven unidentified objects and establish their
archaeological potential.
11b.5.3.2 The Differential GPS was used to position the dive boat as near as possible to each target and a detailed search was conducted at each location. However no objects were found on the seabed. In fact, the seabed was uncharacteristically clean and clear.
11b.5.3.3 There were very high levels of turbidity in the water, due to the study area’s proximity to the Pearl River Delta. It was very difficult to obtain either video footage or still photographs.
11b.5.3.4
It is usually the case in
11b.5.3.5
The metal probe was used to
look for buried objects but none were located. Very detailed surveys were
conducted at each location of all seven unidentified objects and at each
position nothing was located. It
was assumed that the objects had been removed by fishing vessels.
11b.6 Result of Built Heritage Resources Review and Cultural Landscape
11b.6.1.1
A desktop review and survey of
built heritage were conducted. Details of the built heritage resources
within the study area and their locations are presented in Appendix 11b.3
and Figure 11b.4. The location plan in scale 1:1000 is
shown in Figure 11b.5. A heritage structure, namely “Courtyard
Complex” (SK5) on the Shek Kwu Chau Treatment and Rehabilitation Centre of the Society
for the Aid and Rehabilitation of Drug Abusers (SARDA), is identified within the
study area and it is a Grade 3 historic building. The Courtyard Complex was built by the
inhabitants of the facility in Year 1971 as part of SARDA’s rehabilitation
process. The structures were built
in a Roman Architectural Style and use of stone and concrete as construction
materials.
11b.6.1.2
Apart from the Courtyard Complex, four built heritages (SK1-SK4) with no
grading in the SARDA complex were indentified within the study area:
· Administrative Block and Assembly Hall (SK1);
· Recovery House (SK2);
· Office Block (SK3); and
· Mei House and Ming House(SK4).
11b.6.1.3
As described in Section
2, submarine cables would be laid across the water between The artificial
island near SKC and Cheung Sha on
11b.7 Identification of Potential Impacts
11b.7.1.1
Any heritage resources, located
within close proximity to works area of the proposed IWMF may have impact
through:
· Direct impact to historical buildings, historical landscape and sites of terrestrial and marine archaeological potential (e.g. excavation, reclamation and dredging);
· Indirect vibration impact from construction and dust from construction works; and
· Indirect visual impact to historic buildings and cultural landscapes due to construction works.
11b.7.2.1
Impacts on cultural heritages
during operation phase of the Project include:
· Indirect visual impact associated with alteration of the surrounding environment of historical structures and cultural landscapes due to the above-ground structures of the Project; and
· Indirect vibration impact to historical buildings and cultural landscapes from operation of the project plant.
11b.8 Evaluation of Potential Impacts
Terrestrial Archaeology
11b.8.1.1
Based on the results of the desktop
review and site visit, no archaeological site or artefact was identified within
Marine Archaeology
11b.8.1.2
The results of the geophysical survey and diver inspection indicate there
are no archaeological resources within the proposed reclamation area for the
IWMF. Therefore no adverse marine archaeological impact is anticipated due to
the proposed reclamation.
11b.8.1.3
According to the results of the geophysical survey, five unidentified
objects were located within the submarine cables corridor. To minimize the
potential impact, the alignment of the submarine cables were revised to avoid
the unidentified objects. No adverse marine archaeological impact is
anticipated due to the proposed submarine cables.
Built Heritage and Cultural Landscape
11b.8.1.4
Existing built heritages (SK1-SK5)
are located to the north of the Project area. The structures are generally located on
elevated terrain while the Project site is
situated by the southern
coast of the island and the construction activities mainly consists of
reclamation works. Direct impact on
these built heritage sites in the area is therefore not anticipated.
11b.8.1.5
Indirect impacts such as dust,
vibration and visual impacts may occur during the construction of the IWMF;
however, due to the large separation of the built heritages to the Project site, and due to the lack of a direct line of sight, adverse visual
impacts are not anticipated.
Table 11b.3 Potential Impact on Cultural Heritage Sites
|
ID |
Built Heritage Resources |
Existing Grading |
Proposed Grading |
Horizontal Distance from Project Site |
Potential Impact and Impact Level |
|
SK1 |
Administrative Block and
Assembly Hall |
--- |
--- |
Approx.
|
The structure is located about |
|
SK2 |
Recovery House |
--- |
--- |
Approx. |
The structure is located about |
|
SK3 |
Office Block |
--- |
--- |
Approx. |
The structure is located about |
|
SK4 |
Mei House and Ming House |
--- |
--- |
Approx. |
The structure is located about |
|
SK5 |
Courtyard Complex |
3 |
--- |
Approx. |
The structure is located about |
11b.8.2.1 The identified built heritages will not be in direct line of sight of the IWMF. Furthermore, due to the large separation of the historic buildings to the Project site, adverse visual impacts are not anticipated.
11b.8.2.2 Due to the sufficient buffer distance between the structures and the project area, indirect vibration impacts would also not be anticipated.
11b.8.2.3 Based on the preliminary design information, the proposed works under the Project would not result in any changes of access to the identified built heritages.
11b.9 Recommended Mitigation Measures
Terrestrial Archaeology
11b.9.1.1
Since no archaeological site is
located within the study area, no adverse impacts are anticipated and therefore
no mitigation measures are necessary.
Marine Archaeology
11b.9.1.2
As no adverse marine archaeological impact is anticipated, no mitigation measures are required.
Built Heritage and Cultural Landscape
11b.9.1.3
Given the large separation
between the Project site and the built heritages,
adverse vibration, dust and visual impacts on built heritages are not
anticipated. No mitigation measures
are therefore necessary.
Terrestrial Archaeology
11b.9.2.1
There would be no
archaeological impact due to the operation of the IMWF. No mitigation measures are proposed.
Built Heritage and Cultural Landscape
11b.9.2.2
Due to the large separation between
the Project site and the built heritages, no impacts
are anticipated and therefore no mitigation measures are proposed.
11b.10 Environmental Monitoring and Audit
11b.10.1.1
No monitoring and audit programme on cultural heritage would be
required.
11b.11.1.1 Based on the results of the desktop review and survey, no archaeological site was identified within the study area. No adverse archaeological impact is expected.
11b.11.1.2 Regarding the marine archaeological potential in the proposed reclamation area, breakwater and cable corridor for the IWMF, geophysical surveys were conducted. A total of twelve unidentified objects were spotted within the MAI study area. Potential impact to five unidentified objects would be avoided by revising the alignment of the proposed submarine cables, while seven unidentified objects might be affected by the reclamation and breakwater construction. A diver inspection was carried out, trying to locate the seven unidentified objects and establish their archaeological potential. A detailed search was conducted, but nothing was located. The results of the geophysical survey and diver inspection indicate there are no archaeological resources within the proposed reclamation area, and therefore no adverse marine archaeological impact is anticipated due to the proposed reclamation.
11b.11.1.3
One grade 3 historic building (Courtyard
Complex on the Shek Kwu Chau Treatment and Rehabilitation Centre of the Society
for Aid and Rehabilitation of Drug Abusers) and four other built heritage structures
with no grading are identified within the study area. However, due to large separation between
the built heritages and the IWMF, no adverse impacts during the construction and
operation phases are anticipated.
廣東省文物考古研究所 1997 《香港南丫島、長洲島、大鴉洲島、小鴉洲島及石鼓洲島考古調查報告》，香港，古物古蹟辦事處。
Frost,
R. ,C.H. Ho and Bobby Ng 1974 Sha Tsui, Journal of The Hong Kong Archaeological Society, vol. 5. 23-30.
Brage,
J.M., 1965.
Cortesao,
1944. The Suma
Oriental of Pome Pires and the Book of Francisco Rodrigues.
Hayes,
J.W. 1983. The
Rural Communities of
Hydrographic
Office. 2005. Charts for
Local Vessels, Marine Department, Government of the HKSAR.
Moore,
Jean. 1974. The European Grave at Shek Kwu Chau. Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic
Society, Vol. XIV: 186-7.
Peacock & Nixon, 1995. The
Ride,
L. & Ride, M. 1995. An
Sayer,
G. R. 1980.
of Age.
Siu,
K.K., 1977. Forts
and Batteries: Coastal Defence in
List
of the Historic Building Assessment (as of 20 September 2010):
http://www.amo.gov.hk/b5/antiquities.php
List of Sites of Archaeological
Interest in
http://www.lcsd.gov.hk/CE/Museum/Monument
Antiquities
and Monuments Office website: http://www.amo.gov.hk/
SARDA
Website: http://www.sarda.org.hk