13.1.1
Legislation, Guidelines and Criteria relevant to the
consideration of Cultural Heritage impacts include the following:
·
Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance;
·
Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact
Assessment Process;
·
Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance
13.1.2
The Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance
(EIAO) was implemented on
13.1.3
The Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact
Assessment Process (EIAO-TM) lists the general criteria and guidelines for
evaluating and assessing impacts in Annexes 10 and 19. The guidelines state
that preservation in totality and measures for the integration of sites of
cultural heritage into the proposed project will be a beneficial impact. It
also states that destruction of a site of cultural heritage must only be taken
as a last resort.
13.1.4
The Antiquities and
Monuments Ordinance (Cap.53) provides the framework for the Antiquity
Authority to declare any place, building, site or structure to be of public
interest by reason of its historical, archaeological or palaeontological site
or structure. The Antiquities Authority will consult the Antiquities
Advisory Board and seek approval of the Chief Executive to declare a
monument. The
13.1.5
Under
section 6 and subject to subsection (4) of the Ordinance, the following acts
are prohibited in relation to certain monuments, except under permit;
·
To
excavate, carry on building works, plant or fell trees or deposit earth or
refuse on or in a proposed monument or monument
·
To
demolish, remove, obstruct, deface or interfere with a proposed monument or
monument
13.1.6
The
discovery of an Antiquity, as defined in the Ordinance must be reported to the
Authority, or a designated person. The Ordinance also provides that, the
ownership of every relic discovered in
13.1.7
No
archaeological excavation or search may be carried out by any person, other
than the Authority, 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 (or her) to carry out the
excavation and search satisfactorily, has sufficient staff and financial
support.
13.2.1
No
archaeological excavation or search may be carried out by any person, other than
the Authority, 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 (or her) to carry out the
excavation and search satisfactorily, has sufficient staff and financial
support.
13.2.2
The
site formation and slope works will consist of cut and fill works, slope works,
earth retaining walls, irrigation buffer lake, detention ponds and tanks, sand
bunker and golf course capping and turfing. Based on the topography of the golf
course it is estimated that 530,000 m³ of soil and rock will have to be
excavated and recompacted to form the course.
13.2.3
Temporary
works will involve the formation of temporary working platforms and material
storage areas. The earthworks will
include excavation of temporary ditches along the sides of the excavations for
collection of surface water to sump pits/desilting traps from where desilted
water will be discharged into existing drainage system.
13.2.4
The
works for the cart path subgrade include sub-base, concrete paving, road
marking and fencing. The permanent
bridge works include formwork assembly, steel fixing, concrete casting to the
footing/cap and abutment wall, striking and lifting formwork after concreting and
lifting precast concrete beam.
Archaeology
13.3.1
The objectives of the Archaeological Impact
Assessment are as follows:
·
Identification of the heritage issues;
·
Review of the existing data on archaeological
resources;
·
Assessment of the impacts arising from the proposed
golf course extension works;
·
Recommendation of mitigation measures to minimize
impacts on archaeological resources.
13.3.2
The
background to the assessment will include a review of all previous
investigations, including a preliminary environmental review that was
undertaken in 2000 (Archaeological Assessments Ltd. Nov. 2000), which
identified archaeological potential in the proposed public golf course
extension area. Following this
assessment an archaeological survey was commissioned by the Antiquities and
Monuments Office and conducted by the Hong Kong Institute of Archaeology in
November 2001. The survey found
archaeological material in Wan Chai and recommended rescue excavation focused
on the flat-topped hill (an area of approximately 400 sq metres) to be
undertaken prior to construction works.
13.3.3
The
Field Archaeology Unit of the Antiquities and Monuments Office undertook the
excavation works in 2004 (AMO 2005).
The findings concluded that archaeological material can still be recovered
during the golf extension works and therefore a Watching Brief should be
undertaken during the construction programme.
13.3.4
The methodology of the EIA will consist of the
following three steps:
(1) Review of previous investigations;
(2) Assessment of the results of the previous investigations and
impacts arising from the proposed extension;
(3) Recommendations for follow-up action, if required.
Built
Heritage
13.3.5
The objectives of the Built Heritage Impact
Assessment are as follows:
·
Identification of the built heritage resources and
issues;
·
Review of the existing data on historical background
and built heritage resources;
·
Assessment of the impacts arising from the proposed
golf course extension works;
·
Recommendation of mitigation measures to minimise
impacts on identified built heritage resources.
13.3.6
The
background to the assessment will include review of all previous
investigations, including a built heritage survey commissioned by the
Antiquities and Monuments Office and conducted by the Hong Kong Institute of
Archaeology in November 2001. The
survey found built heritage resources in the form of historical graves in the
golf course extension area. A grave survey conducted by the Jockey Club in
early 2005 identified four additional graves.
13.3.7
The methodology of the BHIA will consist of the
following four steps:
(1) Review of previous investigations;
(2) Built Heritage Survey and compilation of catalogue of all
identified built heritage resources;
(3) Assessment of the results of the previous investigations and
impacts arising from the proposed extension;
(4) Recommendations for mitigation measures, if required.
Archaeology
13.4.1
The archaeological potential of Kau Sai Chau is
well-documented. Schofield first
recorded the discovery of three prehistoric archaeological sites, followed with
recorded surface material by Mrs. Welch in early 1960’s (Welch 1962). During the
survey conducted
prior to development of the existing golf course archaeological material from
the late Neolithic and Bronze Age as well as Han and Tang Dynasties was
recovered (Meacham 1994). The
territory-wide surveys conducted in 1986 (Peacock and Nixon 1986) and 1998 (
13.4.2
The
preliminary environmental review carried out in 2000 (Archaeological
Assessments Ltd. 2000) identified the potential for deposits in the proposed
golf course extension area and recommended field evaluation to be undertaken. The field evaluation was proposed to
consist of three steps: systematic field scan to identify any material on the
surface; a systematic auger survey to identify subsurface deposits or cultural
soils and test pit excavations to verify the deposits and associated
stratigraphy. Figure 13.1
identifies the areas where proposed works may impact on areas of archaeological
potential and for which field evaluation was recommended.
13.4.3
The survey was conducted in 2001 on the eastern side
of the island and the entire eastern extension area was scanned for surface
material (HKIA 2001). The survey results indicated 54 locations of surface
material and a late Neolithic archaeological site at Wan Chai (Figure
13.2). The team conducted a total
of 35 auger hole and four test pit excavations. While a late Neolithic cultural layer
was established at Wan Chai, surface material belonging to Warring States,
Song, Ming and Qing dynasties were also recovered.
13.4.4
The subsequent rescue excavation conducted by the
AMO in 2004 confirmed the presence of late Neolithic material all over the
flat-topped hill and a cultural layer dated to the same period at its southern
end; a total area covering c.300 sq metres was excavated (Figure 13.3) (AMO
2005). The Wan Chai Archaeological Site is located within the former firing
range and impacts from the firing range have resulted in soil erosion and
subsequent artefact displacement, hence only in one area a cultural layer was
recorded. The rescue excavation
yielded prehistoric remains such as stone tools and pottery dated to the Late
Neolithic (about 4900-4200 BP). The
rescue excavation also found two ash pit features of unknown date and function.
Built Heritage
Historical
Background
13.4.5 Archaeological finds dating as far back as
the Late Neolithic period has been discovered on Kau Sai Chau, confirming that
the island was used by people in the prehistoric period. Historically, surface
ceramic material from the Song (960-1279), Ming (1368-1644) and Qing
(1644-1911) dynasties has been identified (HKIA 2001). The 2001 survey, did
not, however, identify any cultural deposits or evidence of settlement in the
Study Area. The only extant settlement on the island Kau Sai Tsuen is located
at the southern tip of the island and not in the vicinity of the Study Area.
The village contains a Hung Shing temple, probably dating originally to the 19th
Century. The temple was renovated in 2000. In 1952 parts of Kau Sai Chau were
turned into a firing range. In 1954, a number of the residents moved to Pak Sha
Wan (Kau Sai Sang Tsuen). The main occupation of the Kau Sai Chau inhabitants
was fishing, although agriculture was also practiced.
13.4.6 The
following information was gathered in the desk-based study;
Declared
Monuments
13.4.7
There
are no Declared Monuments in the Study Area.
Graded
Historical Buildings
13.4.8
There
are no Graded Historical Buildings in the Study Area.
Ungraded
Historical Buildings
13.4.9
There are no Ungraded Historical Buildings in the
Study Area.
Cultural
Landscape Features
13.4.10
No
cultural landscape features have been previously recorded in the Study Area.
13.4.11
Previous
surveys have identified graves in the Study Area, most of which have been
renovated recently, i.e. within the past forty years. The families associated
with these graves are Yeung, Lee, Tsui, Wong and Ng. The HKIA 2001 survey also
identified two stone terrace features in the Study Area, which were most likely
associated with former graves that have been removed.
Identified
Resources
13.5.1
The
Study Area is located on the central part of the coast along the eastern side
of the island, see Figure 13.4. The proposed layout can be roughly divided into
northern and southern sections. The northern section is overgrown, but not too
difficult to access. The ground cover consists of a thick covering of ferns and
shrubs, with the higher sections being rocky and having minimal soil cover. The
southern section (Kap Lo Kok) is currently only accessible by speedboat. It
consists of hill slopes and small valleys leading down to for the most part
rocky coastlines. The vegetation cover in most places is very thick with
bushes, small trees and vines.
13.5.2
A field
survey was undertaken in 2001 by the Hong Kong Institute of Archaeology to
identify the full range of built heritage resources in a broad Study Area. The
only resources identified in the current Study Area were 11 grave sites. The
majority of these graves were modern renovations (i.e. all structural material
post-dates 1945), several were structurally historical and one consisted only
of recently relocated Kam Tap in a modern shelter (the kam tap were not
included in the current study). More recently an additional 10 grave sites were
identified, bringing the total to 20. A detailed inventory can be found in
Appendix 13.1 and a map showing the location of all recorded graves in Figures
13.5 and 13.6. A short description of the graves, however, will be presented in
this below section.
13.5.3
Grave #1 (Wong Family) is an excellent example of a
grave Late Qing Dynasty grave. It is a large semi-circular structure,
constructed of concrete and green brick. The stone plaque is framed with
moulded concrete and the enclosure wall of the worshipping platform contains
cut stone blocks and green brick.
13.5.4
Grave #2 (Lin Family) consists of a concrete
enclosure built into the hillside and facing North East. There are some traces
of red painted decoration. The plaque is set into a plain concrete frame. The
worshipping platform is covered in concrete. The inscription states that the
grave was last renovated in either 1918 or 1978. From the condition of the
grave it is most likely that the correct date is 1918. The grave is quite
heavily overgrown with vegetation.
13.5.5
Grave #3 (Diu Family) is a much smaller grave than
the two described above. It consists of a concrete front wall built directly
into the hillside with small enclosure for a worshipping platform directly in
front. The plaque is granite with inscribed lettering with traces of red paint.
The grave was renovated in 1969 and contains no structural elements.
13.5.6
Grave #4 (Diu Family) is very similar to grave #3
and belongs to the same family. It was also renovated in 1969 and contains no
historical structural elements.
13.5.7
Grave #5 (Lau Family) very little of this grave is
still intact. The stone plaque is only partially legible, but apart from the
family name a renovation date of 1862 is also still visible. The only other
structural features remaining are green bricks around the plaque. There is
evidence of shaped earth around the plaque that would have formed the enclosure
and a few pieces of broken concrete/ chunam like material could be also be
seen. There is no evidence that the grave underwent any renovations after the
1862 date inscribed on the plaque.
13.5.8
Grave #6 (Lee family) is a very simple grave with a
small concrete front wall containing the plaque built into the hill side. The
plaque is granite with cut inscription. The grave was renovated in 1963 and
contains no historical elements.
13.5.9
Grave #7 (Yeung Family) Small grave with plain
concrete front wall with curved moulded top, containing grey stone plaque with
carved inscription. Traces of red paint visible in lettering. Concrete platform
across front of grave and low concrete side walls of enclosure. The grave was
renovated in 1964 and contains no historical structural elements.
13.5.10
Grave #8 (Wong Family) Small concrete front wall
with granite plaque, carved inscription with traces of red paint. Red circle
partially visible above the plaque. Renovation date not legible, but from observation grave does not contain any
historical structural elements.
13.5.11
Grave
#9 (Family name not legible) Small concrete front wall with curved and stepped
top wall edge. Stone plaque. The grave was renovated in 1972 and does not
contain any historical structural elements.
13.5.12
Grave
#10 (Wong family) Black stone plaque with carved inscription, set into a green
brick front wall with remnants of chunam covering. Concrete side walls, very
low in front of grave. Grave is in poor condition. The grave was last renovated
in 1912 and does not contain any modern structural elements.
13.5.13
Grave
#11 (Family name not discernible) Large concrete/ chunam covered grave. Black
stone plaque is inset into plain concrete front wall. Semi-circular enclosure
wall above the plaque level. Worshipping platform also has a very low enclosure
wall, concrete. The grave is very overgrown, but in generally good condition.
The grave was last renovated in the 19th Century, though the exact
date was not discernible.
13.5.14
Grave
#12 (Chan Family) Small concrete front wall with granite plaque, carved
inscription. The grave is not set directly into the hillside and there is a
concrete covered dome behind the front wall. Low, plain concrete enclosure
walls in front of the plaque. The grave was renovated in 1964 and does not
contain any historical structural elements.
13.5.15
Grave
#13 A cut stone terrace wall and platform, probably of a former grave, although
there was no evidence of the grave itself. Possibly removed. The stones are
large and oval in shape.
13.5.16
Grave
#14 (Yuen Family) Medium sized grave. Grave walls are constructed of cut stone
blocks of different sizes to produce an irregular pattern. The walls are topped
with moulded concrete. The worshipping platform is covered by concrete. The
plaque is made of white stone. The grave was renovated in 1968 and contains no
historical structural elements.
13.5.17 Grave #15 (Ho Family) Small grave set
into hill side. Plain concrete front wall with dark grey stone plaque with
carved inscription, some red paint visible in the lettering. The grave was
renovated in 1964 and contains no historical structural elements.
13.5.18
Grave #16 (Liu Family) A small grave
built directly into the hillside. Irregular sized cut stone front wall with
curved moulded concrete edge rim. Concrete frame around plaque, concrete with
gold lettering. Thick concrete pointing has been added to the face of the
stonework. Small concrete area in front of grave. The grave was renovated in
1966 and contains no structural historical elements.
13.5.19
Grave #17 (Ng Family) Armchair style
grave with irregular sized cut stone walls and concrete floors and edge
trimming. Three steps leading up to plaque, which is set into a concrete frame
projecting from the back wall of the grave. Granite plaque with carved
inscription. The grave was renovated in 1964 and does not contain any
historical structural elements.
13.5.20
Grave #18 (Wong family) Medium sized
grave, semi-circular design with irregular sized cut stone walls and Granite
plaque with carved inscription. Small, two tiered platform in front of grave.
The grave is set on a relatively flat section of the hillside and there is a
domed concrete covering behind the grave face. The grave was renovated in 1969
and contains no historical structural elements.
13.5.21
Grave #19 (Ng Family) Very large
multi-burial grave of the Ng family. The grave is constructed of concrete with
several plaques (central plaque is stone set in a red painted concrete frame
with red painted circle above. There is also a large red circle at the centre
top of the back wall. The general shape is semi-circular. There is a large
worshipping platform in front of the grave. The grave was renovated in 1970 and
does not contain any historical structural elements.
13.5.22
Grave 20 (Ng Family) Small
semi-circular shaped grave. Irregular cut stone wall with concrete top edging
and frame around plaque. White stone plaque with carved inscription. The grave
was renovated in 1968 and contains no historical structural elements.
Potential
for Additional Built Heritage Resources
13.5.23
The northern coastal section of the Kap Lo Kok Study
Area, see Figure 13.4, is currently very heavily overgrown it was not possible
to access every part of it during the field survey. It is quite possible that
historical graves (similar to Grave #5, i.e. unmaintained with only small portions
still intact) could have been missed in the very thick undergrowth.
Archaeology
13.6.1
During the period 1936 to mid-1970’s the HK
government used Kau Sai Chau as a firing range for aerial bombing and artillery
shelling (Meacham 1994). The firing range activities have left scars in the
landscape. These scars accelerate the natural erosion processes of the
topography and have an adverse impact on any archaeological remains. No other existing impacts are known
within the proposed golf course extension area.
13.6.2
The results of the previous investigations indicate
that within the golf extension area there is potential for archaeology and
c.300 sq metres of the main archaeological potential area identified during the
2001 survey has since been fully excavated. The erosional processes occurring
largely due to the former firing range activities are adversely affecting the
subsurface archaeological deposits and preservation in situ was not an option for the Wan Chai Site. The rescue excavation provided artefacts
dated to the late Neolithic including stone tools and pottery, but potential
for further remains exist.
13.6.3
The proposed construction impacts include
earthmoving works and temporary stockpiling activities, landscaping and
artificial filling.
13.6.4
The construction impacts may directly impact on any
remaining archaeological material.
13.6.5
The majority of the identified graves were found to
be modern renovations and will not be dealt with in this section. Only five of
the graves were found to contain historical structural elements. The following
table shows the potential impacts.
Table 13.1 Potential Adverse
Impacts to Historical
|
Grave # |
Renovation
Date |
Potential
Impact |
|
1 |
(Between 1862 and 1874) |
Works are
planned in the vicinity of the grave (site formation works for the 12th
hole fairway) and the grave structure may be affected by construction
activities, such as cut and fill works, slope works, earth retaining walls. |
|
2 |
Probably (1918) |
None, as no
works are planned in the vicinity of the grave and the grave will be left
in-situ. |
|
5 |
(1862) |
The grave will
have to be removed from its current location. |
|
10 |
(1912) |
None, as no
works are planned in the vicinity of the grave and the grave will be left in-situ. |
|
11 |
(1826, 1836 or
1846) |
None, as no
works are planned in the vicinity of the grave and the grave will be left
in-situ. |
Table 13.2 Potential Impacts to
|
Grave # |
Renovation
Date |
Potential Impact |
|
3 |
1969 |
None, grave
will be left in situ, nearest works are 5 metres away. |
|
4 |
1969 |
None, grave
will be left in situ, nearest works are 12 metres away. |
|
6 |
1963 |
None, grave
will be left in situ, nearest works are 10 metres away. |
|
7 |
1964 |
None, grave
will be left in situ, nearest works are 10 metres away. |
|
8 |
Renovation date
not visible, but all structural elements are modern. |
None, grave
will be left in situ, nearest works are 10 metres away. |
|
9 |
1972 |
None, grave
will be left in situ, nearest works are 10 metres away. |
|
12 |
1964 |
None, grave
will be left in situ, nearest works are 20 metres away. |
|
13 |
Grave removed
(only terrace intact) |
None, as grave
site will be left in situ, nearest works are 5 metres away. |
|
14 |
1968 |
None, grave
will be left in situ, nearest works are 30 metres away. |
|
15 |
1964 |
None, grave
will be left in situ, nearest works are 10 metres away. |
|
16 |
1966 |
None, grave
contains no historical structural elements will be left in situ, nearest
works are 2 metres away. |
|
17 |
1964 |
None, grave
contains no historical structural elements will be left in situ, nearest works are 2 metres away. |
|
18 |
1969 |
None, grave
contains no historical structural elements will be left in situ, nearest
works are 2 metres away. |
|
19 |
1970 |
None, grave
will be left in situ, nearest works are 12 metres away. |
|
20 |
1968 |
The grave will
be removed as part of the project. |
Archaeological
Resources
13.7.1
The potential for further artefactual remains at the
Wan Chai Archaeological Site exist and a watching brief is recommended (Figure
13.7).
13.7.2
A watching brief is a process whereby a qualified
and licenced archaeologist monitors the excavation works during the construction
stage in identified (and agreed with AMO) areas of archaeological
potential. The watching brief
methodology is set out in the EM&A.
The archaeologist conducting the watching brief should obtain a licence
prior to commencement of works as stipulated in Section 12 of the Antiquities
and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53).
The granting of the licence may take up to 8 weeks after the submission
of the licence to the Antiquity Authority.
Built Heritage Resources
Construction Phase
13.7.3
Two of the identified historical graves (
13.7.4
Grave #1: There are works planned in the vicinity of
the grave for the construction of the 12th hole fairway. A three
metere buffer zone will be maintained and clearly marked by a temporary fence
during the construction phase;
13.7.5
Grave #5:
The grave will be removed prior to the commencement of construction
works. It is recommended that the grave be preserved by record. The structural
remains of the grave are minimal (a plaque and a small section of green bricks
around the plaque). The preservation by record should include a cartographic,
photographic and written record as well as a measured drawing. If AMO requires
the retention of any historical structural elements associated with the grave,
i.e. the plaque. The contractor will ensure the safe removal and transport of
the material off the site.
13.7.6
Grave #20: This grave will be removed prior to
commencement of construction works. It is recommended that the grave be
preserved by record. The
preservation by record should include a cartographic, photographic and written
record as well as a measured drawing. If AMO requires the retention of any
historical structural elements associated with the grave, the Contractor will
ensure the safe removal and transport of the material off the site.
13.7.7
The northern coastal section of the Kap Lo Kok Study
Area of the proposed golf course extension is currently very heavily overgrown
and parts of it were not accessible during the field survey. The area has the
potential to contain as of yet unidentified historical graves and it is recommended
that during the construction phase, that if during the course of works a grave
is found that the AMO is contacted immediately and that works stop in the
immediate vicinity of the grave until it can be inspected by AMO staff.
Archaeology
Wan Chai Archaeological Site.
13.8.1
A watching brief should be undertaken by a qualified
and licenced archaeologist during excavation works at the construction stage in
the identified area marked on Figure 13.7.
A qualified archaeologist should inspect the site at an interval of not
less than once a month when there is excavation work on site. A construction programme should be
provided to the archaeologist to arrange the inspection schedule. The archaeologist should be notified no
less then 2 working days prior to any changes on the commencement of the
excavation works so arrangements can be made to monitor the works. The ET and IEC should facilitate
arrangements and liaise between the archaeologist and construction contractor.
13.8.2
Monitoring is a form of mitigation which is required
when engineering works impact on areas that have been assessed as having
archaeological potential and where conventional testing methods are deemed not
sufficient. The range of archaeological
resources that require monitoring include both historical and prehistoric
material and features.
13.8.3
The watching brief process entails the observation
of the engineering works by qualified archaeologists in order to identify any
archaeological material or features revealed during the excavation phase of the
works schedule. Upon identification
of such material or features the archaeologists will require immediate access
to the excavation area for recording of the material/features in situ location, antiquities retrieval
and sample collection.
13.8.4
These guidelines serve for two basic purposes,
firstly, that the archaeological resources are adequately recorded and
recovered and secondly, that appropriate measures are taken on site to create a
minimum of delays to the engineering schedule.
13.8.5
Methodology of the Watching Brief:
Monitoring personnel
13.8.6
Watching brief should be undertaken by a qualified
archaeologist, who must apply for a licence under the Antiquities and Monuments
Ordinance (Cap. 53) from the Antiquity Authority before the monitoring works
commence.
Areas to be monitored
13.8.7
The areas which require watching brief shall be
defined in figure 13.7 to be submitted by the qualified archaeologist under the
project and agreed with AMO prior to commencement of works.
Site access
13.8.8
Archaeologists should be allowed reasonable access
to relevant areas of groundworks, so that deposits can be examined and
recorded. Trenches may require
temporary shoring and groundworks might need to be temporarily rescheduled, to
provide a safe environment for such works.
Provision should be made, at the earliest stage of construction
programming, for unrestricted archaeological access to areas of groundworks in
the identified area of archaeological potential (figure 13.7).
Monitoring and retrieval methodology
13.8.9
Table 1, below, shows the various categories of
archaeological material and features that are most likely to occur in local
contexts. Also listed are the
recommended type and degree of recording and retrieval required for each
category. Upon discovery of any archaeological materials and features, the
archaeologist shall report to the AMO immediately.
Recording
forms for watching brief
13.8.10
A set of forms for the recording of any
archaeological material identified during the watching brief process must be agreed
by the AMO. They should include the
following:
l
Registers to record the finds, special finds,
contexts, photographs, drawings, levels and samples
l
Context description forms
l
A daily record form designed specifically for
archaeological watching brief. This
form must locate clearly the area of works monitored, the nature and extent of
the works, summaries of the days findings and cross reference to all register
numbers used that day.
Safety requirements
13.8.11
Archaeologists and staff employed in monitoring must
follow the safety procedures enforced by the contractors on site.
Mitigation Measures
13.8.12
The project proponent should allow a flexibility to
undertake the contingency arrangements.
Should significant archaeological materials be discovered, appropriate
mitigation measures will be designed and implemented by the project proponent.
Progress Report
13.8.13
The archaeologist should keep the AMO informed of
the progress of watching brief. The
archaeologist should submit progress reports every 3 months during the
programme of the watching brief.
Watching brief report
13.8.14
The procedures and result of the Watching Brief
should be presented in report form, following standards set by the AMO for
reports on other types of archaeological field work. This includes details of the overall
programme, methodology, sampling strategy, implementation, findings and
interpretation. All data, material
and records forming the site archive must be submitted to the AMO upon
completion of the project.
13.8.15
The monitoring report should contain, as a minimum,
the following elements:
l
Non-technical summary
l
Site location (including maps and relevant drawings)
and descriptions
l
Context of the project
l
Geological and topographical background
l
Archaeological and historical background
l
General and specific aims of field works monitoring
l
Reference to relevant legislation
l
Field methodology
l
Collection and disposal strategy for artefacts and
ecofacts
l
Arrangement for immediate conservation of artefacts
l
Publication and dissemination proposals
l
Archive deposition
l
Timetable
l
Contingency arrangement (if appropriate)
Table 13.3
Categories of archaeological finds and recommended
action
|
Categories of Archaeological Material |
Retrieval Procedure |
|
Human burial
|
Full recording
and recovering of human remains and associated features
|
|
Intact features
|
Limited recording
and recovery of archaeological features
|
|
Intact
artefacts
|
Recovery of
artefacts
|
|
Isolated
material
|
Recovery of
artefact fragments/archaeological material
|
|
Deposits with
archaeological potential Soil deposits
which exhibit characteristics associated with archaeological remains in |
Sampling of the
deposit
|
Built Heritage
13.8.16
The following measures will be necessary to mitigate
the adverse impacts arising from the proposed works during the construction
phase;
·
A three metre fenced off buffer zone will be
maintained around Grave #1 during the construction phase;
·
·
For the northern coastal section of the Kap Lo Kok
Study Area, it is recommended that if during the course of construction works,
a grave is found that the AMO is contacted immediately and that works stop in
the immediate vicinity of the grave until it can be inspected by AMO staff.
Table
13.4
Summary
of Mitigation Measures and Implementation Schedule
|
Resources |
Proposed
Works |
Mitigation |
Implementation Agent |
Implementation Date |
|
Wan Chai Archaeological Site |
Site formation and construction works |
Archaeological
Watching Brief |
Contractor |
Construction Phase |
|
Grave #1 |
Site formation and construction works |
Fenced of
three metre buffer zone around the grave |
Contractor |
Construction Phase |
|
Grave #5 |
Site formation and construction works |
Preservation
by record; and
recovery of structural elements (if required by AMO) |
Contractor |
Construction phase (prior to commencement of works) |
|
Grave #20 |
Site formation and construction works |
Preservation
by record; and
recovery of structural elements (if required by AMO) |
Contractor |
Construction phase (prior to commencement of works) |
|
Any,
as of yet unidentified graves at Kap Lo Kok |
Site formation works |
If a grave is found works will stop in the immediate vicinity of the
grave until it can be inspected by AMO staff. |
Contractor |
Construction Phase |
Archaeology
13.9.1
The archaeological impact assessment for the
extension of the golf course concluded that the bay at Wan Chai is an
archaeological site. The site was
excavated and assessed that some potential for archaeological material remains
and a watching brief should be conducted to fully record this site. The extent of area which requires
monitoring under the watching brief is shown in Figure 13.7.
Built Heritage
13.9.2
The Built Heritage Impact Assessment has identified
that the impacts can be mitigated with the implementation of the following
measures; the creation of a three meters buffer zone around Grave #1 during the
construction phase and the preservation by record (and removal of structural
elements if required by the AMO) of Graves #5 and #20. It is also required that
the contractor notify the AMO if any additional graves are encountered during
works in the along the northern coastal section of the Kap Lo Kok Study Area.
AMO files
Geotechnical Engineering Office. Aerial
Photograph Library.
Civil engineering library
Geological survey maps scale 1:20 000
Antiquity
and Monuments Office-Field Unit 2005. The Archaeological Investigation cum
Excavation for the Proposed Extension of Public Golf Course at Kau Sai Chau,
Sai Kung 2004. Unpublished.
Archaeological
Assessments Ltd. 2000. HKJC Kau Sai Chau Public Golf Course New Development.
Preliminary Environmental Review-Cultural Heritage Review. Binnie, Black
and Veatch.
Hong
Kong Institute of Archaeology 2001. The 2001 Archaeological Survey and
Assessment for the Proposed Extension of Public Golf Course at Kau Sai Chai,
Sai Kung. For AMO.
Meacham
W. 1994. Report on an Archaeological Excavation of
Peacock
B.A.V. and T.J.P. Nixon 1985. Report of the
Rogers,
P. R. J. Van Den Bergh, G.P. Edgeley-Long and S. Draper-Ali 1998. Sai Kung:
The archaeological Survey. Unpublished.
Strange,
P. J., R. Shaw and R. Addison 1990. Geology of Sai Kung and
Welch W. M. 1962. A New Archaeological Site in Hong Kong, (JHKKRAS Vol.2), pp.109-104.