4.1.1.1
This section presents a cultural heritage impact
assessment of the Project, identifying cultural heritage resources, assessing
potential direct and indirect impacts from proposed works on these resources,
and recommending mitigation measures where required. The cultural heritage
resources will include both terrestrial archaeology and built heritage.
4.2.1.1
A description of the project can be found in Section 3 of this report including the layout of the proposed tunnel alignment,
stations and associated structures.
4.3.1
Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance and Technical Memorandum
4.3.1.1
The EIAO was implemented on 1 April 1998. Its
purpose is to avoid, minimise and control the adverse impact on the environment
of designated projects, through the application of the EIA process and the
Environmental Permit (EP) system.
4.3.1.2
The Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment Mechanism
applies to “Sites of Cultural Heritage” within a project Study Area. A Site of
Cultural Heritage is defined “as an antiquity or monument, whether being a
place, building, site or structure or a relic, as defined in the Antiquities
and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53) and any place, building, site, or structure
or a relic identified by the Antiquities and Monuments Office to be of
archaeological, historical or palaeontological significance”.
4.3.1.3
The general criteria and guidelines for evaluating
and assessing impacts to Sites of Cultural Heritage are listed in Annexes 10
and 19 of the EIAO-TM. It is stated in Annex 10 that all adverse impacts to
Sites of Cultural Heritage should be kept to an absolute minimum and that the
general presumption of impact assessment should be in favour of the protection
and conservation of all Sites of Cultural Heritage. Annex 19 provides the
details of scope and methodology for undertaking Cultural Heritage Impact
Assessment (CHIA), including baseline study, impact assessment and mitigation
measures.
4.3.2
4.3.2.1
Chapter 10 of the Hong Kong Planning Standards and
Guidelines (HKPSG) details the planning principles for the conservation of
natural landscape and habitats, historical buildings and archaeological sites.
The document states that the retention of significant heritage features should
be adopted through the creation of conservation zones within which uses should
be restricted to ensure the sustainability of the heritage features. The
guidelines state that the concept of conservation of heritage features, should
not be restricted to individual structures, but should endeavour to embrace the
setting of the feature or features in both urban and rural settings.
4.3.2.2
The guidelines also address the issue of the
preparation of plans for the conservation of historical buildings,
archaeological sites and other antiquities. It is noted that the existing
Declared Monuments and proposed Monuments are listed in the explanatory notes
of Statutory Town Plans and that it be stated that prior consultation with the
Antiquities and Monuments Office (AMO) is necessary for any redevelopment or
rezoning proposals affecting the Monuments and their surrounding environments.
4.3.2.3
It is also noted that planning intention for
non-statutory town plans at the sub-regional level should include the
protection of monuments, historical buildings, archaeological sites and other
antiquities through the identification of such features on sub-regional layout
plans. The appendices list the legislation and administrative controls for
conservation, other conservation related measures in
4.3.3
Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance
4.3.3.1
The Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (the AM
Ordinance) provides the statutory framework for the preservation of objects of
historical, archaeological and palaeontological interest. The AM Ordinance contains the statutory
procedures for the Declaration of Monuments. The proposed monument can be any
place, building, site or structure, which is considered to be of public
interest by reason of its historical, archaeological or palaeontological
significance.
4.3.3.2
Under Section 6 and subject to sub-section (4) of
the AM 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; and
· To demolish, remove, obstruct, deface or interfere with a proposed monument or monument.
4.3.3.3
The discovery of an Antiquity, as defined in the AM
Ordinance must be reported to the Antiquities Authority (the Authority), or a
designated person. The AM Ordinance also provides that, the ownership of every
relic discovered in
4.3.3.4
No archaeological excavation may 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.
4.3.3.5
It should also be noted that the discovery of an
antiquity under any circumstances must be reported to the authority, i.e. the
Secretary for Development or designated person. The authority may require that
the antiquity or suspected antiquity is identified to the authority and that
any person who has discovered an antiquity or suspected antiquity should take
all reasonable measures to protect it.
4.3.4
Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
4.3.4.1
This document, as issued by the AMO, outlines the
specific technical requirement for conducting terrestrial archaeological and
built heritage impact assessments and is based upon the requirements of the
EIAO-TM. It includes the parameters and scope for the Baseline Study,
specifically desk-based research and field evaluation. There are also included
guidelines encompassing reporting requirements and archive preparation and
submission in the form of Guidelines for
Archaeological Reports and Guidelines for the Handling of Archaeological Finds
and Archives.
4.3.4.2
The prerequisite conditions for conducting impact
assessment and mitigation measures are presented in detail, including the
prediction and evaluation of impacts based upon five levels of significance
(Beneficial, Acceptable, Acceptable with Mitigation Measures, Unacceptable and
Undetermined). The guidelines also state that preservation in totality must be
taken as the first priority and if this is not feasible due to site constraints
or other factors, full justification must be provided.
4.3.4.3
Mitigation measures will be proposed in cases with
identified impacts and shall have the aim of minimising the degree of adverse
impact and also where applicable providing enhancement to a heritage site
through means such as enhancement
of the existing environment or improvement to accessibility of heritage sites.
The responsibility for the implementation of any proposed mitigation measures
must be clearly stated with details of when and where the measures will be
implemented and by whom.
4.3.5
Development Bureau Technical Circular
(Works) No. 06/2009: Heritage Impact Assessment Mechanism for Capital Works
Projects
4.3.5.1
The technical circular (TC) contains the procedures
and requirements for assessing heritage impact arising from the implementation
of new capital works projects as defined in Section 5 of the TC. It is stated
in the document that the works agent will provide a checklist to the AMO of any
heritage sites (as defined in the TC) situated within or within the vicinity of
the project boundary (usually to be defined as not more than 50 metres measured
from the nearest point of the project boundary, including works areas).
4.3.5.2
The identification of the heritage sites should be
undertaken at the earliest possible stage, preferably as part of the Technical
Feasibility Statement. If the works boundary cannot be defined at this stage,
the checklist should be provided as soon as the project boundary has been
defined. Upon receipt of the above information from the works agent, the AMO
will determine if the proposed project will affect the heritage value of any
heritage site and decide the necessity of conducting a Heritage Impact
Assessment (HIA) based upon the submitted information.
4.3.5.3
If an HIA is required, the works agent shall submit
a proposal for the scope of the HIA for AMO approval. Once the scope has been
approved it will be the responsibility of the works agent to conduct the HIA.
4.3.5.4
For a designated project under the EIAO, where a
CHIA (that is an assessment of impacts to Sites of Cultural Heritage, namely
Declared Monument) is required, a separate HIA will not be required for any
Sites of Cultural Heritage (Declared Monument) included in the CHIA. An HIA may
be required for cultural heritage resources not covered under the requirements
of the EIAO.
4.4
Objectives of the Cultural Heritage Impact
Assessment
4.4.1.1 A CHIA must be undertaken in order to identify the impact that the proposed project construction and operation may have on the cultural heritage of the Study Area. The specific objectives of the CHIA include the following:
· To undertake a baseline study of the project study area in order to identify all heritage resources as identified in the Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment;
· To identify any Sites of Cultural Heritage (i.e. Proposed and Declared Monuments) within the project study area and assess any impacts that will arise from the proposed project and recommend mitigation measures as appropriate; and
· To identify the impacts to identified cultural heritage resources and recommend that mitigation for these resources be implemented under an alternative mechanism, as this is not covered under the EIAO. It should be noted that HIA could be used as an alternative mechanism if agreed by AMO.
4.5.1
Background
4.5.1.1
It should be noted that it is only legitimate to
implement environmental impact mitigation measures for Sites of Cultural
Heritage (namely Declared Monuments) as defined under Schedule 1 of the EIAO
through the environmental permit conditions. The definition/interpretation for
Sites of Cultural Heritage under Schedule 1 of the EIAO consists of “any place,
building, site or structure or a relic identified by the Antiquities and
Monuments Office to be of archaeological, historical or paleontological significance.”
4.5.1.2
The CHIA comprises the identification of terrestrial
archaeological and built heritage impacts to Sites of Cultural Heritage and the
assessment methodology for each of these tasks is highlighted below. It should also be noted that as
stipulated in the Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment, all
resources that fall within the scope of the guidelines will be included in this
report. The mitigation recommendations for resources that are not Sites of
Cultural Heritage will be implemented under an alternate mechanism to be agreed
with AMO.
4.5.2
Terrestrial
Archaeology
Baseline
Study
4.5.2.1
As stated in the Guidelines
for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment, the baseline study is used to
compile a comprehensive inventory of all areas of archaeological interest
within the project Study Area, which for this project will be all works areas
and works sites within 50m around the boundary of the works areas (Figure 4.1). The results are then
presented in a report that provides both clear evidence that the required
processes have been satisfactorily completed as well as a detailed inventory of
all identified sites of archaeological interest, which includes a full
description of their cultural significance.
4.5.2.2
The following tasks are undertaken in order to
gather the necessary information for the compilation of the baseline study:
Task 1: Desk-based
research
4.5.2.3
Firstly, desk-based research is carried out in order
to identify any known or potential sites of archaeological interest within the
project Study Area and to evaluate the cultural significance of these sites
once identified. The following is a non-exhaustive list of resources that are
consulted as part of the research programme: the AMO published and unpublished
papers and studies; publications on relevant historical, anthropological and
other cultural studies; unpublished archival papers and records; collections
and libraries of tertiary institutions; historical documents held in the Public
Records Office, Lands Registry, District Lands Office, District Office and
Museum of History; cartographic and pictorial documentation; and geotechnical
information.
Task 2: Site visit
4.5.2.4
In order to supplement the information gathered in
the desk-based study, a site visit is undertaken to assess the current status
of the Study Area and also to make note of existing impacts.
Task 3:
Archaeological Field Investigation (if required)
4.5.2.5
If the results of the desk-based study and site
visit indicate that there is insufficient data for purposes of identification
of sites of archaeological interest, determination of cultural significance and
assessment of impacts, an archaeological field investigation programme will be
designed and submitted to the AMO for approval. Once approved, a qualified
archaeologist must apply for a licence to undertake the archaeological
excavation, which must be approved by the Antiquities Authority before
issuance. The archaeological field investigation typically consists of some or
all of the following steps:
4.5.2.6
Field Scan - Field walking is conducted to
identify archaeological deposits on the surface. The scanning of the surface
for archaeological material is conducted, under ideal circumstances, in a
systematic manner and covers the entire Study Area. Particular attention is given to areas
of land undisturbed in the recent past and to exposed areas such as riverbed
cuts, erosion areas, terraces, etc.
During the field scanning, concentrations of finds are recorded, bagged
and plotted on 1:1000 scale mapping and are retained as part of the
archive. Topography, surface
conditions and existing impacts are noted during the field walking.
4.5.2.7
Auger Testing Programme - Auger survey will be carried
within the Study Area in order to establish soil sequence, the presence/absence
of cultural soils or deposits and their horizontal extent.
4.5.2.8
The auger tool consists of a bucket, pole and handle
and is vertically drilled by hand into the surface. When the bucket is filled with soil the
auger is extracted and the soil emptied from the bucket. Soils are described
and depth changes are measured inside the hole. The depth and type of any finds
recovered are also recorded. The
auger hole is abandoned when water table, the end of the auger or rock is
reached or the auger bucket fails to hold the soil. The location of each auger
hole test is marked on a 1:1000 scale map. The results of the auger tests
provide one of the criteria used to position the test pit excavations.
4.5.2.9
Test Pit Excavation - Test pit excavations are
carried out to verify the archaeological potential within a study area. The
choice of location for test pit excavations will depend on various factors such
as desk-based information, landforms, field scan and auger test results as well
as issues relating to access.
4.5.2.10
Hand digging of test pits measuring between 1 by 1
and 2 by 2 metres is carried out in order to determine the presence/absence of
archaeological deposits and their stratigraphy. The size may depend on close proximity
to large trees, narrow terraces or other external factors. Hand excavation will
continue until decomposing rock or sterile soils are reached and no potential
for further cultural layers exists.
A test pit will also be abandoned when the maximum safe working depth is
reached or when, despite the use of appropriate and practicable dewatering
measures, the effects of ground water prevent further excavation. In cases where sterile deposits or the
maximum safe excavation limit cannot be reached, the AMO should be consulted
prior to backfilling.
4.5.2.11
During excavation contexts, finds and features are
recorded, soils are described and relevant depths measured. Artefacts are
collected, bagged and labelled by context.
Sections are photographed and drawn and, if required, ground plans are
also photographed and/or drawn. The
position of each test pit, its top and bottom levels and associated temporary
benchmark are recorded by a qualified land surveyor and plotted on 1:1000 scale
mapping. On completion of all recording and site inspection by the AMO, test
pits are backfilled.
Reporting
and Submission of Archive
4.5.2.12
A report of the findings of the archaeological
survey will be compiled following the requirements as outlined in the AMO’s Guidelines for Archaeological Reports.
The processing of recovered archaeological material and preparation of the
project archive will follow the AMO’s Guidelines
for Handling of Archaeological Finds and Archives.
Impact
Assessment
4.5.2.13
The prediction and evaluation of both direct and
indirect impacts must be undertaken to identify any potential adverse affects
to all identified Sites of Cultural Heritage within a project Study Area. A
detailed description of the works and all available plans (with their
relationship to the identified resources clearly shown) should be included, to
illustrate the nature and degree of potential impacts. The impact assessment
must adhere to the detailed requirements of Annexes 10 and 19 of the EIAO-TM.
Mitigation
Measures
4.5.2.14
As stated in the Guidelines
for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment “Preservation in totality must be
taken as the first priority”. If such preservation is not feasible, as in the
case where the need for a particular development can be shown to have benefits
that outweigh the significance of the site of archaeological interest, a
programme of mitigation measures must be designed and submitted to the AMO for
approval. The mitigation measures must be clearly listed and the party
responsible for implementation and timing of the measures must also be
included. Examples of mitigation measures include rescue excavation and
archaeological watching brief.
4.5.3
Built
Heritage
Baseline Study
4.5.3.1
A desk-based study has been undertaken to determine the presence of
built heritage resources in the project Study Area. Information has been
gathered from the following sources; the list of Declared Monuments and Graded Buildings
and Government Historic Sites as issued by the AMO; published and unpublished
papers and studies; publications on relevant historical, anthropological and
other cultural studies; unpublished archival, papers, records; collections and
libraries of tertiary institutions; historical documents which can be found in Public
Records Office, Lands Registry, District Lands Office, District Office, Museum
of History; cartographic and pictorial documentation. The desk-based study has
also included a review of previous built heritage projects in the Study
Area.
4.5.3.2
The study area for the built heritage assessment comprises an area of 300m around the
boundary of the works areas and works sites (Figure 4.1).
Built Heritage Field Survey (if required)
4.5.3.3
The results of previous surveys undertaken in the recent past have been
used to identify resources in the project Study Area. The parts of the Study Area that have
not been surveyed in the recent past, have had a built heritage field survey undertaken to identify all built heritage
resources (as defined in the Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Impact
Assessment). The survey followed the requirements of the
Guidelines for CHIA, including the scope of resources, methodology and
recording and report preparation processes
Definition of Built Heritage Resources
4.5.3.4
All pre-1950 structures, these include all built features, such as;
domestic structures, ancestral halls, temples, shrines, monasteries and
nunneries, village gates, village walls, sections of historical stone paving, wells, schools, any post-1950
structure deemed to possess features containing architectural or cultural
merit; all pre-war clan graves and cultural and historical landscape features,
such as fung shui woods and ponds, historical tracks and pathways, stone
walls and terraces, ponds and other agricultural features.
Evaluation of Heritage Significance of Built Heritage Resources
4.5.3.5
There is currently no official standard for the evaluation of heritage
resources in Hong Kong, and thus, the practice of categorising resources must
be seen as an on-going process that will be updated and improved as refinements and additional
features are added to the existing information base. As such the following
guide will be used for the current impact assessment:
· Declared or Proposed Monuments: High;
· Graded Historic Buildings: Moderate;
· Government Historic Sites: Moderate; and
·
Non-Graded
Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations
4.5.3.6
Prediction and identification of both direct and indirect impacts that
may affect any Sites of Cultural Heritage within the project Study Area will be
undertaken, with special attention paid to the Sites of Cultural Heritage
identified in the project study brief. Preservation in-situ will always be the first priority for Sites of Cultural
Heritage. If preservation in totality is not possible, mitigation will be
proposed to minimise the degree of adverse impact to the greatest possible
extent. Also, any disturbance to
Sites of Cultural Heritage that may cause physical damage should be avoided
wherever possible through alteration of design, construction method or
protective measures as appropriate.
4.6
Archaeological Impact Assessment
4.6.1
Archaeological Sites
4.6.1.1
There are no known
archaeological sites located within the project Study Area. However, some known archaeological
materials have been found in the vicinity of the Study Area. In May 2004, over 100 pieces of
archaeological materials, including Tang kiln debris and associated furniture,
Han dynasty pottery cauldron sherds and four complete pottery pots (possible
burial objects) dated to Jin dynasty were discovered at a Drainage Services
Department (DSD) work site at the junction of Soy Street and Tung Choi Street.
All of the archaeological materials were collected from a working trench
covered with pipes and piles. It
was believed that the materials were deposited in a brownish sandy layer
between the modern disturbed layer and the greyish sand of marine deposit (AMO
web site). Such finds serve to
indicate the possibility of such resources occurring in a similar urban setting
in the Study Area.
4.6.1.2 However, there have been no previous archaeological investigations undertaken within the project Study Area.
4.6.2
Geological and Topographical Background
4.6.2.1
The
Study Area comprises of the general areas at Yau Ma Tei, Ho Man Tin (including
King’s Park), and Hung Hom (Figure 4.2). The basic geology of the
4.6.2.2
Appendix 4.1 summarises the topographical and
geological information for each area of potential impact.
4.6.3
Historical
Background
4.6.3.1
The
proposed works areas at Hung Hom are situated along former coastline of Hung Hom
Bay (see Figure 4.3 for 1863 map
showing the area prior to reclamations), which has the potential for
prehistoric as well as historical archaeological remains. The Hong Kong Whampoa Dock Company set
up its yard at Hung Hom in the 1860s.
The Hung Hom community by that time was one of the largest new
commercial and industrial settlements in Old British Kowloon (Hayes and Smith
1976). As seen in 1902-03 map (Figure 4.4), the 1880 built Dock
Battery was situated in a headland south of
4.6.4
Existing
Impacts
4.6.4.1
The
Study Area is located in an urban area with extensive disturbance from urban
development. The existing impacts at
the impacted areas can be summarised as existing roads, metro stations, utility
provisions (such as water, sewer, electricity, phone lines, gas, etc.),
residential development and development of public spaces. All of the proposed impact areas are
currently under concrete, occupied with existing buildings, stations or on
reclaimed land.
4.6.5
Evaluation of Archaeological Potential
4.6.5.1
The
former coastline of
4.6.5.2
A
summary of the assessment of the archaeological potential within the Study Area
is shown in Appendix 4.2.
Operational Phase
4.6.5.3
There
will be no impacts to archaeological resources at any of the works sites or
works areas during the operational phase.
No mitigation measures are required.
4.6.6
Archaeological Cumulative Impacts
4.6.6.1
There
are three EPIW sites in the project Study Area and these will be assessed as
concurrent projects in this report;
· Connections to Oi Man Estate and Ho Man Tin Estate (including the subway from HOM Station across Chung Hau Street and the covered walkway along Chung Hau Street, Chung Yi Street and Fat Kwong Street) and the associated slope stabilisation works;
·
Public transport facility and
·
Passageway and covered
footbridge over
4.6.6.2
These
sites do not contain any archaeological potential and no cumulative impacts
will arise.
4.7
Built Heritage Impact Assessment
4.7.1
Results of the Desk Based Study
Historical
Background of the Study Area
4.7.1.1
Yau Ma Tei: Yau Ma Tei was
originally an anchorage for boat dwelling families and it was not until the
1860’s that it grew as a land based market town. The original inhabitants were
collections of people dispossessed from cleared villages in Tsim Sha Tsui. The
area quickly grew as a market town with evidence of a locally organised Kai
Fong and
4.7.1.2 Ho Man Tin: Ho Man Tin was chosen as the site for a number of historical recreational clubs during the late 19th Century, many of which are still located on their original sites. The area also has military associations and still contains barracks at Gun Club Hill. The map in Figure 4.10 shows the outline of the boundary of the Gun Club Hill Barracks in 1947 (Empson 1992).
4.7.1.3 Hung Hom: The former settlement at Hung Hom had an associated Kwun Yam Temple which is still in its original location (see 1924 map in Figure 4.11 for location).The area around the old village of Hung Hom was sold as a shipyard in 1864 and the Hong Kong and Whampoa Shipyard was set up in 1866 and fully operational by 1870. Squatter areas developed around the shipyards to house the workers encompassing the old village. A devastating fire destroyed what was left of the old village and much of the squatter area in 1884. New housing and facilities were planned and constructed on a street grid laid out in the area and reclamation. The area was heavily bombed in WWII, as the shipyards were a major target (Hayes 1966). There are also two air raid precaution tunnel networks K4 and K5 in the area and their locations can be seen on the 1947 map found in Figure 4.12.
Sites of
Cultural Heritage (Declared Monuments)
4.7.1.4
It should be noted that the mitigation measures recommended in this
report will not be implemented under the EIAO as there are no Sites of Cultural
Heritage (namely Declared Monuments) in the project Study Area. Therefore all
other resources and mitigation discussed below would be implemented under a
separate mechanism to be agreed with AMO.
Graded
Historical Buildings (as of May 17 2010)
4.7.1.5
The catalogue of the following
graded structures can be found in Appendix
4.3.
GB-1: Tin Hau Temple
(Yau Ma Tei) (Grade 1) AM86-0366
4.7.1.6
The location of GB-1 is shown
on Figure 4.15. The temple was constructed between 1860 and
1869. It is the largest temple in
GB-2: Old South Kowloon District Court (
4.7.1.7 The location of GB-2 is shown on Figure 4.16. The court building was constructed in the Classical Revival style in 1936 and was originally known as the Kowloon Magistracy. Its original function was to handle minor criminal cases. It was renamed the Kowloon District Court in 1957 and functioned as such until 1986, at which point it became the Judiciary Central File Repository. It was also used as the Lands Tribunal. It was also used by the Japanese as a military headquarters during WWII. The building is currently in use by the HKSAR Government.
GB-3:
4.7.1.8 The location of GB-3 is shown on Figure 4.22. The temple was built in 1873 and the principal deity of the temple is Kwun Yam and there is also a shrine to the Tai Sui or sixty gods of time. The temple is traditional in style with a front, middle and rear hall. The front hall is shaped like a Chinese Pavilion and the carving at the entrance dates to 1889. The temple underwent major renovations in 1889 and 1901. The building is currently in use as a temple.
GB-4: The Former Pumping Station, Water
Supplies Department (
4.7.1.9
The location of GB-4 is shown
on Figure 4.14. The structure was built in 1895 and is
also known as the red brick house. It was part of a coal fired pumping station
with steam engines that was the oldest such facility in
GB-5: Yau Ma Tei Theatre on
4.7.1.10
The location of GB-5 is shown
on Figure 4.14. The theatre was built around 1930
(possibly as early as 1928) and is the only surviving pre-war cinema in
GB-6: Yau Ma Tei Wholesale Fruit Market (
4.7.1.11 The location of GB-6 is shown on Figure 4.14. The market was built in 1913 and was originally called the Government Vegetable Market selling both fruit and vegetables. From the 1930’s to the 1960’s it was also used as a fish market, From 1965, when the fish and vegetable vendors moved to new premises, the market has specialized in selling fruit. The structures are still in use as a market.
GB-7: Yau Ma Tei Police Station (
4.7.1.12 The location of GB-7 is shown on Figure 4.15. The police station was constructed in 1922 to replace an older station situated nearby. The original station consisted of two wings in a triangular shape with a compound and associated structures, such as garages surrounding a parade ground. An extension block was added in the 1950’s. The buildings are still in use as a police station.
GB-8: Tung Wah Group of
4.7.1.13
The location of GB-8 is shown
on Figure 4.13. The building dates to 1911 and
originally functioned as the main hall building of
GB-9:
4.7.1.14 The location of GB-9 is shown on Figure 4.19. The church was constructed in 1931 and was founded by the London Missionary Society. During World War II, the Japanese converted the church into a stable. After the war, the church was renovated. It is still in use as a church today. The building is currently in use as a church. The church has been proposed as a Grade 1 Historic Building under the current government grading exercise.
GB-10: Military facility within the Gun Club
Hill Barracks (Tsim Sha Tsui
4.7.1.15 The location of GB-10 is shown on Figure 4.20. The barracks were established in the second half of the 19th Century, though the exact date is not certain. The first permanent structures were built in 1903-04 and a series of additional structures were added up to 1909. Many of the older buildings were replaced over the years, apart from two original barracks blocks (Blocks 1 and 2), a medical centre (Block 11) and the officers’ mess (Block 9) (Horsnell 1998). The buildings are currently still of military usage. The currently existing Graded Buildings are Gun Club Hill Barracks Block 1 (Grade 3), Gun Club Hill Barracks Block 2 (Grade 3) and Gun Club Hill Barracks Block 9 (Grade 2). Under the proposed government grading exercise the military facility within the Gun Club Hill Barracks is proposed as Grade 1 (AMO Website).
GB-11:
4.7.1.16 The location of GB-11 is shown on Figure 4.23. The temple was built in 1929 and the materials used are believed to have been taken from older temples that were demolished. The temple is a Qing Vernacular style building, but has been renovated in non-traditional style, which has significantly lowered the architectural value of the building (AMO Website).
HB-15: Municipal Services Staff Recreation
Club at No
4.7.1.17 The location of HB-15 is shown on Figure 4.18. The club was established in the 1950’s and has been used as a recreation club for members of the government municipal services since that time. The club has also been called the Municipal, Urban and Regional Services Staff Recreation Club or Urban Council and Urban Services Staff Recreation Club. It consists of two club buildings with a small garden and badminton and tennis courts (AMO Website).
HB-16: The
4.7.1.18 The location of HB-16 is shown on Figure 4.18. The club was originally known as the Kowloon Indian Tennis Club and is believed to date back to 1924. It originally only consisted of changing huts and tennis courts. The present club house was built in 1956 and a new wing added in 1976. The architectural style of the building is International Modern. The club buildings were renovated in 2000 (India Club Website). The building is in use as a private club (AMO Website).
HB-17: The Club de Recreio (Grade 3)
4.7.1.19
The location of HB-17 is shown
on Figure 4.18. The club was founded by the Portuguese
community in
HB-18:
4.7.1.20
The location of HB-18 is shown
on Figure 4.19. The club was founded in 1904 by
Other
Built Heritage Items
4.7.1.21
The
following ungraded built heritage items have been identified in the project
Study Area. Full descriptions of the ARP tunnels can be found in Appendix 4.4 and descriptions of the
remainder of these items can be found in the catalogue in Appendix 4.5.
HB-1: Air Raid Precaution Tunnels at
4.7.1.22
The location of HB-1 is shown
on Figure 4.16. This tunnel network consists of ARP
tunnels that were built to protect the population of
HB-2: Air Raid Precaution Tunnels at
4.7.1.23
The location of HB-2 is shown
on Figure 4.13. Tunnel Network K1A is located to the
east of
HB-3: Air Raid Precaution Tunnels at
4.7.1.24
The location of HB-3 is shown
on Figure 4.22. This tunnel network
is located in the area between
HB-4: Air Raid Precaution Tunnels at
4.7.1.25 The location of HB-4 is shown on Figure 4.21. The supplementary report on the inspection of the tunnel network did not provide any useful information on the history, location or condition of the tunnels Mott, Hay Anderson 1982). However, a later report concerning the remedial repair works for this tunnel network contained the following relevant information; the tunnel network was categorised as a high priority network with respect to the potential for collapse affecting the general public and the remedial works were completed in May 1992. These consisted of filling in of voids above the tunnel network and backfilling of sections of the network. It was also noted that the tunnel network has high levels of Radon gas and that prolonged exposure to the atmosphere within the tunnels is a health hazard (Mott MacDonald 1992).
HB-5: Metal Box and Adjacent Pole (between
4.7.1.26 The location of HB-5 is shown on Figure 4.16. The original function of the two items is unknown, as is the ownership. The box may be a low voltage distributor box and the pole may have been associated with utilities either electrical or lighting. The structures have no current function.
HB-6:
4.7.1.27 The location of HB-6 is shown on Figure 4.18. This building is currently being used by the YMCA as the King’s Park Centenary Centre as a youth centre and was constructed in 2000. The only historical element remaining is a plaque from 1940 that has been set into the side wall of the new structure.
HB-7: United Services Recreation Club
4.7.1.28
The location of HB-7 is shown
on Figure 4.19. The club opened in 1911 and was originally
for use of military officers and their families. The club was forced to close
down during the Second World War and it is believed the club buildings were
used by the Japanese during the occupation. Prior to the war, the club had a
golf course on the site of the existing
HB-8: Nos.
4.7.1.29 The location of HB-8 is shown on Figure 4.22. A three storey tenement style building believed to have been built in the 1940’s. The ground floor contains a shop; the remainder of the building appears to have been vacant for some time (ERM 2008).
HB-9: Nos.
4.7.1.30 The location of HB-9 is shown on Figure 4.21. A four storey tenement style concrete building that was constructed in 1951. It has been modified extensively on the exterior, with only one unit showing the original appearance with balcony (ERM 2008).
HB-10: No. 7A
4.7.1.31 The location of HB-10 is shown on Figure 4.21. A reinforced concrete tenement style building probably dating to the 1940’s. Commercial premises on the ground floor with two storeys of flats above and no decorative features (ERM 2008).
HB-11:
4.7.1.32 The location of HB-11 is shown on Figure 4.22. A four storey tenement style building believed to date from the 1940’s. The building is constructed of concrete with no supporting pillars on the façade (ERM 2008).
HB-12: Nos.
4.7.1.33 The location of HB-12 is shown on Figure 4.22. A four storey tenement style building believed to date from the 1940’s. The building is constructed of concrete with no supporting pillars on the façade (ERM 2008).
HB-13: Fuk Tak Temple/Shrine at the Corner of
4.7.1.34 The location of HB-13 is shown on Figure 4.22. The history of the temple is believed to date back to the Song Dynasty, but the original location is unknown. The current building is modern and is managed and used by the local residents (ERM 2008).
HB-14:
4.7.1.35
The location of HB-14 is shown
on Figure 4.16. The church was constructed in 1950/51
and is a concrete and tile structure built on a hillside. It is built in the
Modern Eclectic style of architecture with International, Bauhaus and local
influences. The church is also associated with the
HB-19:
4.7.1.36 The location of HB-19 is shown on Figure 4.19. The building was constructed in 1931 and consists of a two storey structure with adjacent garage. It was built in the Neo-Classical Style with possible Art Deco and Italian Renaissance influences. It originally functioned as the pastor’s residence and then as a Christian Action Centre. The building is currently being used as offices for charity organisations (AMO Website).
4.7.2
Results
of the Field Survey
Scope of Field
Survey
4.7.2.1
In addition to the graded and ungraded buildings and resources
identified above, a field survey was undertaken to identify other features of
potential built heritage importance within the Study Area. The survey was conducted in July 2009
and covered the 300 m boundary from all works areas (Figure 4.1).
Survey Findings
4.7.2.2 The following heritage resources were identified in the Built Heritage Survey. Full descriptions of these items can be found in the catalogue in Appendix 4.5.
HB-20: No. 2 Man Ming
Lane in Yau Ma Tei
4.7.2.3 The location of HB-20 is shown on Figure 4.14. Four storey tenement style building probably dating to the mid 20th Century. It has a shop on the ground floor and residential units above with concrete balconies enclosed by windows with metal grilles.
HB-21:
4.7.2.4 The location of HB-21 is shown on Figure 4.15. Four storey tenement style corner building, concrete construction with rounded balconies and having progressively smaller units as the building reaches upwards.
HB-22: Nos.
4.7.2.5 The location of HB-22 is shown on Figure 4.14. Corner and adjacent tenement style buildings with supporting pillars on the façade still intact. Both units have shops on the ground floor with modified residential units above.
HB-23: K.I.L. 7058 Boundary Stone
4.7.2.6
The location of HB-23 is shown
on Figure 4.16. Rectangular cut
granite stone approximately 30 cm in height with K.I.L. engraved on the west
facing side.
HB-24: K.I.L. 6069 Boundary Stone
4.7.2.7
The location of HB-24 is shown
on Figure 4.16. The boundary marker
is part of a cut granite wall with one of the blocks having the boundary lot
inscribed on its face.
HB-25: K.I.L. Boundary Stone (number not
visible)
4.7.2.8
The location of HB-25 is shown
on Figure 4.16. Base of wall, stone wall of the Diocesan Girl’s School along
HB-26: K.I.L. 6246 Boundary Stone
4.7.2.9
The location of HB-26 is shown
on Figure 4.20. Flat rectangular
cut granite stone with lot inscription on its
face.
HB-27: Nos. 197 and 197A
4.7.2.10 The location of HB-27 is shown on Figure 4.14. Three storey tenement building with flat roof and additional structures built. The buildings retain traditional features such as granite support columns and moulded decoration.
HB-28:
4.7.2.11 The location of HB-28 is shown on Figure 4.17. Four storey pawn shop structure. Large balconies with green painted metal bars on the middle two floors and a small balcony also with bars on the top floor. There is a parapet wall with “1940” painted on it at the centre top of the facade.
HB-29: Nos.
4.7.2.12 The location of HB-29 is shown on Figure 4.17. Highly modified Tenement Structure with three floors, modern features on façade and additional structures built on the top.
HB-30: Nos.
4.7.2.13 The location of HB-30 is shown on Figure 4.17. Tenement style building with granite columns and some original moulding on the façade. The remainder of the building’s exterior has modern features.
HB-31:
4.7.2.14 The location of HB-31 is shown on Figure 4.14. This is a four storey tenement style building with intact support columns on ground floor. There is some decorative moulding retained on the façade. The upper floors have modern windows.
HB-32:
4.7.2.15 The location of HB-32 is shown on Figure 4.21. Four storey tenement building with upper stories projecting over the ground floor façade. There are no support columns, but a metal support beam has been added at the front left hand side of the building.
HB-33:
4.7.2.16 The location of HB-33 is shown on Figure 4.13. Concrete structure with plain concrete exterior, moulded rounded arches over the entrance and windows. There is a high bell tower on the northern end of the façade.
HB-34:
4.7.2.17
The location of HB-34 is shown
on Figure 4.13. Multi-storey concrete structure with
concrete tower and rectangular church structure. The windows of the side wall
along
HB35: Nos.
4.7.2.18 The location of HB-35 is shown on Figure 4.23. Reinforced concrete structure, three storeys in height. Enclosed balconies (some with older style metal window grilles). Modern structures have been built on the original roof level. Three sets of staircases lead to the upper floors.
4.7.3
Assessment of Construction Phase Impacts
Background
4.7.3.1 Different construction methods will be applied for various elements of the project including the tunnels and station boxes. The type of methods used can influence the magnitude of any impacts of built heritage resources and are, therefore, summarised below.
4.7.3.2 Drill-and-Blast Tunnel Formation: This method is proposed to be used in areas where the alignment will pass through rock and the tunnel formation is achieved through blasting of the rock with explosive charges and excavation of the material to form the tunnel. This will be undertaken for the following tunnel sections; Yau Ma Tei to the proposed EAP at the Club De Recreio (WS3), EAP to HOM Station (WS10) and from HOM Station to WHA Station (WS29).
4.7.3.3 Mechanical Excavation Tunneling: This method will involve the use of machines, such as breakers for breaking up of rock. This method is proposed to be used in some sections of the tunnel formation between Yau Ma Tei and the EAP site
4.7.3.4 Open Cut / Cut-and-Cover Method: Excavation will be undertaken by backhoes and bulldozers in soil deposits followed by mechanical breaking / blasting through rock layers. This method is proposed to be used at HOM Station and WHA Station.
4.7.3.5 Soft Ground Tunnelling: Supporting structures will be required for the excavation area to ensure soil stability. This method is proposed to be used in some sections of tunnel between the EAP site and HOM Station and from HOM Station to WHA Station.
Evaluation of
Impacts and Mitigation Recommendations
4.7.3.6
The following section will present the impact assessment and proposed
mitigation measures for the identified resources in the project Study Area. The
project Study Area has been divided into works sites (that will include
construction activities) and works areas that will be used for site offices, a
barging point and a temporary explosives storage magazine site. Details of the
evaluation of impacts for Works Sites can be found in Appendix 4.6. The evaluation of impacts for Works Areas can be
found below.
4.7.3.7
It should be noted that the mitigation measures recommended in this
report will not be implemented under the EIAO as there are no Sites of Cultural
Heritage (namely
4.7.3.8
The following Works Areas will be used during the construction phase of
the project:
·
WA2a: Site Office at
·
WA6: Site Office at
· WA12a: Temporary Magazine Site at Tsuen Kwan O Area 137;
· WA13: Formation of a temporary Magazine Site at Tsuen Kwan O Area 137;
· WA14: Barging Point at Existing Hung Hom Finger Pier; and
·
WA15: Site Office at
4.7.3.9
There are no built heritage resources in the study areas for any of the
works areas apart from WA15 at Fat Kwong Street Playground and WA2a at
4.7.4
Assessment of Operational Phase Impacts
Background
4.7.4.1
As the proposed alignment will
be largely underground during the operational phase, potential impacts will be
associated only with above ground structures rather than the railway
alignment. These structures include
elements of stations that are above ground, such as ventilation shafts,
entrances, pedestrian access structures (covered walkways and footbridges) and
the EAP / ventilation building at the Club de Recreio site.
Evaluation
4.7.4.2
The impact assessment will cover the following permanent above ground
features associated with the project, EAP at Club de Recreio, HOM Station and
associated features, including footbridge from
HOM Station and WHA Station
4.7.4.3
The stations and associated structures will be located in a modern urban
setting and will not impact on the existing environmental setting of the
identified resources within the project Study Area. No mitigation will be
required.
4.7.4.4
There are two identified resources in the vicinity of the EAP /
ventilation building, the Club de Recreio and the Municipal Services Recreation
Club. The latter is a modern structure and is situated in a modern urban street
setting. As such no adverse impacts will arise from the construction of the EAP
/ ventilation building. The Clubhouse of the Club de Recreio is a historical
building set in fenced off grounds. The addition of the ventilation building
within the grounds has the potential to create adverse visual impacts to the
club compound. Mitigation measures of visual impacts such as architectural
design of the EAP / ventilation building will be recommended under Section 5
Landscape and Visual Assessment.
4.7.5
Built Heritage Cumulative Impacts
4.7.5.1
There
are three EPIW sites in the project Study Area and these are considered as
concurrent projects for purposes of this assessment;
· Connections to Oi Man Estate and Ho Man Tin Estate (including the subway from HOM Station across Chung Hau Street and the covered walkway along Chung Hau Street, Chung Yi Street and Fat Kwong Street) and the associated slope stabilisation works;
·
Public transport facility and
·
Passageway and covered
footbridge over
4.7.5.2
These
sites will not cause any adverse impacts to Built Heritage Resources during the
construction or operation phases of the project and no cumulative impacts will
arise.
4.8.1.1 No residual terrestrial archaeological and built heritage impacts have been identified.
4.9
Environmental Monitoring and Audit Requirements
4.9.1.1 No mitigation will be required under the EIAO for cultural heritage resources affected by this project as there are no “Sites of Cultural Heritage” in the project Study Area. The mitigation recommendations presented in this report will be implemented under a separate mechanism to be agreed with AMO.
4.10.1
Terrestrial Archaeology
4.10.1.1 No mitigation will be required during the construction phase of the project. It should be noted that if any antiquity or supposed antiquity is discovered during the course of the excavation works undertaken by the contractor, the contractor will report the discovery to the Antiquities and Monuments Office immediately and shall take all reasonable measures to protect it. No impacts are expected during the operational phase and no specific mitigation measures for archaeological resources will be required.
4.10.2
Built Heritage
4.10.2.1 The following mitigation recommendations will not be implemented under the EIAO. The implementation of mitigation will be undertaken by the Project Proponent. The BHIA for the project has identified that two built heritage resources will be directly impacted by the proposed works. These are two Air Raid Precaution Tunnel Networks (KT4 and KT5). Sections of the tunnels will be filled in by mass concrete prior to the commencement of construction works to ensure safety of the work sites during the construction phase. Mitigation in the form of full cartographic and photographic survey of the affected tunnel sections will be conducted to ensure that the impacts to the tunnels will be acceptable. The report of the cartographic and photographic surveys will be submitted to AMO for approval prior to the commencement of the construction works.
4.10.2.2 Indirect impacts will arise from ground-borne vibration associated with major site formation works, such as tunnel formation. As the resources identified in this impact assessment falls outside of the jurisdiction of the EIAO, appropriate vibration monitoring on the affected Built Heritage resources will be agreed with the Antiquities and Monuments Office (AMO), Buildings Department (BD) / Geotechnical Engineering Office (GEO) under the requirements of the Building Ordinance and/or Blasting Permit as appropriate.
4.10.2.3
The following mitigation
recommendations will not be implemented under the EIAO as the resources
identified in this impact assessment falls outside of the jurisdiction of the
EIAO. The mitigation will however be included in the contract requirements and
implemented by the contractor. Indirect impacts to the India Club (GB-16) which
is in close proximity to construction works may occur. This will arise from
contact with machinery and equipment used in the course of the construction
activities. Mitigation in the form of provision of a buffer zone is
recommended. The buffer zone should provide a minimum area of 5 m (or less only
if constrained by site restrictions) between the identified structure and the
construction work. The buffer zone will be marked out by temporary fencing. The
exterior walls of structures in close proximity to works will be provided with
protective covering for the duration of works in the vicinity (subject to the
landlord’s agreement). Approval will be sought from AMO
prior to the commencement of the above mitigation measures.
Operational Phase
4.10.2.4
Operational phase impacts have been predicted for the ventilation
building at the Club de Recreio only where addition of the ventilation building
within the grounds has the potential to create adverse visual impacts to the
club compound. Recommendations such as architectural design of the EAP /
ventilation building to mitigate the visual impacts will be included in Section
5 Landscape and Visual Assessment.
AMO Files
Yau Ma Tei Police Station (
Tin Hau Temple (Yau
Ma Tei) (Grade 2) AM86-0366
Old South Kowloon District Court (
Some Buildings in Gun Club Hill Barracks (Grades 2 and 3)
Results of the Assessment of 1444 Historic Buildings (as of May 17 2010)
The Engineer’s Office of the Former Pumping
Station, Water Supplies Department (
Yau Ma Tei Theatre on
Yau Ma Tei Wholesale Fruit Market (
Tung Wah Group of
Books and Articles
Empson, H. Mapping Hong Kong A Historical Atlas, Government Information Services, Government Printer, Hong Kong (1992)
Hayes, J. Old British Kowloon, Journal of the Hong Kong Royal Asiatic Society, Vol VI pp.120-137 (1966)
Hase,
P (Ed.). In the Heart of the Metropolis: Yau Ma Tei and Its People (The Royal
Asiatic Society, Hong Kong Branch), Joint Publishing (H.K.) Company Limited,
Horsnell, R. The Story of the Gun Club Hill Barracks in Journal of the Hong Kong Royal Asiatic Society Vol. 38 Pp. 265 – 280 (1998).
Lam,
S. And Chang, J. (Ed.) The Quest for Gold: 50 Years of Amateur Sports in Hong
Kong, 1947-1997,
Government Reports
BH1 Agreement No CE 11/77 Investigation of Disused Tunnels Network: Final Report on Network No. K1 Gascoigne Road (Mott, Hay and Anderson 1979)
BH2
Agreement No CE 11/77 Investigation of Disused Tunnels Network: Preliminary
Report on Network K4
BH3 Agreement No CE 11/77 Investigation of Disused Tunnels Network: Supplementary Report on Network K5 Valley Road (Mott, Hay, Anderson 1982)
BH4 Agreement No CE 11/77 Investigation of Disused Tunnels Network: Preliminary Report on Network K1A Nathan Road (Mott, Hay, Anderson 1978)
BH5 Agreement No CE 11/77 Investigation of Disused Tunnels Network: Final Report on Network K1A Nathan Road (Mott, Hay, Anderson 1979)
BH6
Agreement No. CE 61/2006(DS) Upgrading of Central and
BH7
Contract No. GC /89/12 Disused Tunnels – Phase III – Remedial Works, Network
No.
BH8
Agreement No. CE 32/99 Comprehensive Feasibility Study for the Revised Scheme
of South
Internet
United Services Recreation Club Website