10.1.1 This section presents a cultural heritage impact assessment of the
Project in accordance with the requirements set out by the EIA Study Brief and
EIAO-TM. It identifies cultural heritage resources, and assesses potential direct
and indirect impacts caused by proposed works on these resources, and recommends
mitigation measures where required.
Overview
10.2.1 Legislation, Plans, Standards, and Guidelines relevant to the consideration
of Cultural Heritage impacts under this study include the following:
·
Environmental
Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) (Cap. 499, S.16);
·
Technical
Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process of the EIAO (EIAO-TM), Annexes 10 and 19;
·
Antiquities
and Monuments Ordinance (A&MO) (Cap. 53);
·
Guidance
Notes on Assessment of Impact on Sites of Cultural Heritage in EIA Studies;
·
Hong
Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG)
(Chapter 10); and
·
Specific
Technical Requirements as Stipulated
in the EIA Study Brief No.ESB-220/2011.
Environmental Impact Assessment
Ordinance (Cap.499, S.16)
10.2.2 Schedule 1 Interpretation 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 (Cap.
53) 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”.
Technical Memorandum on
Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM), Annexes 10 and 19
10.2.3 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.
Antiquities
and Monuments Ordinance (Cap.53)
10.2.4 The Antiquities and
Monuments Ordinance provides the statutory framework for the preservation
of objects of historical, archaeological and paleontological interest.
10.2.5 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. The criteria for evaluating and
assessing impacts are listed in relevant guidelines issued by AMO of Leisure
and Cultural Services Department (LCSD).
10.2.6 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
10.2.7 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 Hong Kong after the commencement of this
ordinance shall vest in the Government from the moment of discovery. The
Authority on behalf of the Government may disclaim ownership of the relic.
10.2.8 No archaeological
excavation can be carried out by any person, other than the Authority and the
designated person, without a licence issued by the Antiquities 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.
Guidance Note on Assessment of Impact
on Sites of Cultural Heritage in EIA Studies
10.2.9 The set of guidance notes
assists the understanding of the requirements set out in Section 2 of Annexes
10 and 19 of the EIAO-TM in assessing impact on sites of cultural heritage in
EIA studies. The guidance notes serve only as a reference and are not meant to
be exhaustive nor comprehensive.
Hong
Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (Chapter 10)
10.2.10 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 sites of archaeological interest, and addresses the
issue of enforcement. The appendices list the legislation and administrative
controls for conservation, other conservation related measures in Hong Kong,
and Government departments involved in conservation.
Specific
Technical Requirements as Stipulated in EIA Study Brief
10.2.11
The
EIA Study Brief No. ESB-220/2011 (ESB) issued in March 2011 includes the scope for
the cultural heritage impact assessment and requirements for engaging an
archaeologist to identify any possible existence of sites or remains of
archaeological interest that will be affected by the demolition and
construction works of the Project. An archaeological survey will be required to
further assess the archaeological potential of the Study Area if the findings
reveal the existence of such possibility. Appropriate mitigation measures
should be proposed and implemented prior to the commencement of any
construction works if sites or remain of archaeological interest are identified
during the survey.
10.3.1 The
Study Area covers an area that stretches 300m from the proposed boundary
of project site. The Works Area and Study
Area are shown in Figure
10.1.
Baseline Study and Field Survey
10.3.2 A baseline study in form of literature review
was conducted. The relevant information
has been analyzed, collected and collated to determine the presence of
historical occupation in the Study Area and thus assess the potential existence
of cultural heritage within the potential impacted area:
·
Background
information (e.g. AMO 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;
·
Identification
of previously recorded cultural heritage resources within the project boundary
which will be supplemented by field survey as necessary subject to findings of
the desktop review; and
·
AMO’s
most recent list of historic buildings with their existing and respective
proposed grading.
10.3.3 Field
surveys have been conducted with following tasks:
·
Field
walking was carried out at the Study and Works Areas to: identify
archaeological potential areas and built heritage; provide photographic and
written records of features of built heritage and mark the location of build
heritage and cultural landscape in 1:1000 scale maps.
10.3.4 In
accordance with the ESB, an archaeological baseline and desktop study has been
conducted by an archaeologist to collect available and relevant information of
previous archaeological, historic studies within the Study Area. Information on the sites of archaeological
interest list by AMO has also been reviewed to identify the existence of any sites
or archaeological remains to be affected by the demolition and construction
works.
10.3.5 The
baseline archaeological condition was established through the desktop review,
field walking and impact assessment taking into consideration any
archaeological resources that would be adversely affected by the demolition and
construction works.
10.3.6 Features
of built heritage which fall within the scope of built heritage survey include:
·
Pre-1950
structures, which include any built features (apart from historic or clan
graves, historical land use, and cultural
landscapes features, which are dealt with separately) such as domestic
structures, temples, churches, monasteries and nunneries, wells, schools,
historic walls, bridges and stone tablets;
·
Post
1950 structures deemed to possess features containing architectural or cultural
merit;
·
Pre-World
War II (pre-1942) historic graves;
·
Cultural
landscape features;
·
Historical
land use features, such as historical tracks and pathways, stone walls and
terraces, ponds and other agricultural features; and
·
AMO’s
most recent list of historic buildings.
10.3.7 In
this assessment, the cultural significance of heritage resources have been
assessed to establish a baseline condition for the identification of the
potential impacts arising from the demolition and construction works as well as
recommendations for 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 the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), cultural significance means
aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value.
Archaeology
10.4.1 A desktop study and field walking exercise have
been conducted to collate available information in order to establish the
baseline conditions and identify the archaeological potential areas within the Study
and Works Areas. Historical, geological and archaeological information of the Areas
were reviewed, including previous historical, geological and archaeological
studies, aerial photographs, historic maps and geological maps.
10.4.2 No sites of archaeological interest[1]
and no archaeological potential landscape and archaeological remains were
identified within the 300 m Study Area and Works Area.
10.4.3 The Sha Tin WTW was
first commissioned in 1964, which has largely transformed the landscape into an
urban one. On the other hand, with the
development of New Town at Shatin since the 1970s, the coasts of Shing Mun River have also been largely transformed into an urban
landscape. No archaeological survey has
covered the area prior to these developments.
10.4.4 Prior to the development of Shatin New Town,
historical villages are located at the arable lands where the Shing Mun River exited into Tide Cove (also known as “Sha Tin Hoi”). On
the other hand, no historical settlement has been detected from ancient maps
within the Works Area. Moreover, while
many sites of archaeological interest in Hong Kong have been identified on
river terraces, such landforms in this area have been converted into the Tai Po
Road (since 1902) and the Toll Plaza for Eagle’s Nest Tunnel of the Tsing Sha Highway (since 2007) (refer
to Figure
10.2). Furthermore, with the
hilly landscape in the Works Area, it is suggested that the Works Area was less
suitable for human occupation in the past in comparison to the arable flatlands
to the northeast. It is therefore
anticipated that no archaeological potential has remained within the Study and Works
Areas.
Built Heritage
10.4.5 Review of historical maps revealed that there are several historical
villages in Shatin. The nearest
historical village is Keng-hau[2] village, which is situated at approximately 500 m east of the Works
Area. In general, historical villages in
the area are situated on flat arable lands on the coast of the pre-reclaimed
Tide Cove (also known as “Sha Tin Hoi”). The Study Area is to the southwest of the
Tide Cove, where the hilly landscape occupies, and is less suitable for human
occupation.
10.4.6 Based on review of the List of the Historic
Buildings in Building Assessment prepared (as of 27 December 2013) and Results of the Assessment of New Items in addition to 1,444 Historic
Buildings, which are both prepared by AMO, together with the observations during site
visits, built heritage resources within Study Area have been identified.
Details of the built heritage resources within the Study Area are presented in Appendix 10.1,
with their locations showing in Figure 10.1 and Plate 10.1. Key resources are highlighted below:
Declared Monuments
10.4.7 No declared monument[3] is identified within the 300 m Study Area.
Graded Historic Buildings
10.4.8 Three graded historic buildings[4] have been identified within the 300 m Study
Area.
·
BH01 – Yeung
Ancestral Hall, No. 7 Hin Tin, Shatin (Grade 3)
·
BH02 – Law Ancestral
Hall, No. 8 Hin Tin, Shatin (Grade 3)
·
BH03 – So Ancestral
Hall, No. 9 Hin Tin, Shatin (Grade 3)
10.4.9
Hin Tin (顯田) village was erected
in the 1920s by the government to relocate three clans of villagers in the Shek Lei Pui Valley (石梨貝谷) due to the construction of the Shek Lei Pui
Reservoir: the Yeungs, the Laws and the Sos. They were
originally Hakkans from Nantou
(南頭) who resided in Hong Kong perhaps some 300 years ago.
10.4.10
The three ancestral
halls were built connected together forming a single three-bay-block on the
front row of the three rows of houses at Hin Tin village, which faces
north. After a fire in 1988 in the Law
Ancestral Hall (middle bay), the three halls were then repaired, with
authenticities kept to its traditional vernacular design. Currently, the three
halls retained their intended ancestral worship function by the local Yeungs, Laws and Sos.
10.4.11 An earth shrine was recorded in the latest available EIA Study near Hin
Tin Village[5]. The structure is newly
renovated and is therefore a modern structure.
This earth shrine is used by the locals for casual ritual practices with
no relation to any formal festivals or other significant intangible cultural
heritage activities. As it lacks obvious
cultural heritage value from architectural, historical and cultural
perspective, this item is therefore not considered as cultural heritage
resources.
Government Historic Site
10.4.12 One government historic site, Ex Kowloon-Canton Railway (KCR) Beacon
Hill Tunnel [6] has been identified within the Study Area, façade wall of tunnel portal
in house shore shape, its 5.8 m high above the original railway, was built of
granite ashlars work and retained as original.
·
BH04 – Ex Kowloon-Canton
Railway Beacon Hill Tunnel
10.4.13 The Ex KCR (also known as the “First
KCR Beacon Hill Tunnel”[7]) was first constructed in 1906 and opened in 1910. It has been the
major route between New Territories and Kowloon since then, where freight and
passengers can swiftly move along by train.
A new Beacon Hill Tunnel (second KCR Beacon Hill Tunnel) was constructed
in the 1980s, which replaced this first tunnel.
Concrete lining, gas pipelines and some auxiliary systems, such as
lighting, gas detectors etc were then installed along the tunnel after its
disuse[8].
Graves
10.4.14
A local spot for
placing burial urns and graves has been identified to the west of Hin Tin
village. Upon field inspection, it is
observed that there has been major refurbishment of the graves in the 2000s,
which render the grave styles to have modern appearances. On the other hand,
none of the deceased has any significant historic status related to any
historic events in Hong Kong. Therefore,
these graves have negligible historic values, and are not considered as
historic graves.
10.5.1 No historic buildings or graves are situated within the Works Area.
Therefore, no direct impact is anticipated.
10.5.2 The three graded historic buildings are situated at approximately 270 m
from the Works Area. With the roads and
trees serving as soft buffers, indirect vibration impact due to drill
activities during construction phase is anticipated to be insignificant.
10.5.3 The construction site office in the Works Area is in close proximity
horizontally to the Ex KCR Beacon Hill Tunnel portal. Four existing staff
quarters would be refurbished to be used as construction site office, and no
ground works would be carried out at hill slope west to the portal. As only
refurbishment works would be carried out within 100 m from the Ex KCR Beacon
Hill Tunnel, no significant vibration impact is therefore anticipated. The
closest source of vibration during construction phase to this Tunnel is in the
northwest to the portal at about 120 m in plan and 8 m in elevation, where a new administration building is proposed to be built
(refer to item 11 in Figure 3.1). Given that a considerable
distance between the construction area and the tunnel, ground-borne vibration
is not anticipated to be significant.
10.5.4 No historic buildings or graves are situated within the Works Area. Therefore, no direct impact is anticipated.
10.5.5 The three graded historic buildings would
remain as the existing conditions, as the water treatment facilities will
continue to operate in situ. As the facilities have imposed no impact up
on these buildings, no impact is anticipated during the operation phase.
10.5.6 The most of Ex KCR Beacon Hill Tunnel portal would
remain in existing condition, the tunnel will continue to be run through by gas
pipeline and as the water treatment facilities will continue to operate in-situ.
As the facilities have no works in the tunnel, no impact is anticipated
during the operation phase.
10.6
Mitigation of Cultural Heritage Impacts
10.6.1 As no impact is anticipated for the three graded historic buildings in
Hin Tin village, no mitigation measure is therefore required for them.
10.6.2 It is noted that the nearest Works Area to
the Ex KCR Beacon Hill Tunnel would involve only refurbishment works for four existing
staff quarters as construction site office without major construction works (refer
to Figure 2.1
and Figure
10.1) during construction phase (refer to Section 10.5.3). The possible piling and drilling activities
of the new administration building would take place at approximately 120 m away (horizontally) (and 8 m vertically) from the tunnel portal (refer
to Figure
10.1). As a precautionary measure, a peak particle velocity (ppv) limit of 7.5mm/s is recommended, measuring at the façade wall of tunnel portal and inside the tunnel where it is closest to the Works
Area during piling and drilling works.
10.7
Evaluation of Residual Cultural Heritage Impacts
10.7.1 An EIA has been conducted for the Shatin-Central Link (SCL) project[9], which has partial overlapping with this project. The SCL EIA Report anticipated no impact to
the cultural heritage items identified in the area same as this EIA.
10.7.2 As no impact is anticipated on the three graded historic buildings in
Hin Tin village in this EIA, no residual cultural heritage impact is
anticipated.
10.7.3 Ground-vibration is anticipated from the construction works as stated in
section 10.5.3, which would insignificantly impact the Ex KCR Beacon Hill
Tunnel. With proper implementation of
mitigation measures suggested in Section 10.6.2, potential impact to the Ex KCR
Beacon Hill Tunnel would be minimized, and the residual impact is considered to
be acceptable.
10.8
EM&A Requirements
10.8.1
No specific EM&A
requirements would be required during construction phase.
Built Heritage
10.8.2
Given the considerable separation distance (approximately
270 m) between the three graded historic buildings at Hin Tin village and the Works
Area, there would be neither adverse vibration nor visual impacts on the Hin
Tin village built heritages, and thus no specific EM&A requirements would
be required.
10.8.3
Given that distance between the Ex KCR Beacon
Hill Tunnel and the proposed new administration building in about 120 m,
vibration impact is anticipated to be insignificant. However, as a precautionary measure, a ppv limit of 7.5mm/s is recommended, including measuring
the façade wall of tunnel portal and inside the tunnel where it is closest to
any construction works during the piling and drilling works. Measurements should be made
by properly calibrated device and under the supervision of the Registered
Structural Engineers (RSE) or his representatives.
10.8.4
No specific EM&A requirements would be required
during operation phase.
10.9
Conclusion
10.9.1
Cultural heritage resources within the Study Area
have been identified and reviewed through site surveys and literature review.
10.9.2
Based on baseline review, no archaeological
potential is present within the Study Area.
Therefore no impact to archaeology is anticipated.
10.9.3 Direct impact on three existing graded historic buildings at Hin Tin village and the Ex KCR Beacon
Hill Tunnel during construction phase is not anticipated. Considering sufficient buffer distances between the built heritages at Hin Tin
village (approximately 270 m) and the proposed works areas, there would be
insignificant visual and vibration impact
during construction and operation phases.
10.9.4 Four existing staff quarters would be refurbished to
be used as construction site office located in close proximity to the west of Ex
KCR Beacon Hill Tunnel portal (refer to Figure
2.1), and the proposed Administration Building cum Mainland East
Laboratory would also be built at about 120 m to the northwest of the portal (refer to Figure 10.1). Due to the proposed work design and distance
between these buildings and the tunnel portal, vibration impact on the facade
wall of portal is considered to be insignificant. As precautionary measure, ppv
limit of 7.5mm/s is recommended, including measuring at the facade wall of tunnel
portal and inside the tunnel where it is nearest to any construction works within the
Works Area.
10.9.5 In
conclusion, the construction and operation of the Project would not cause
unacceptable impacts on cultural heritage resources, with implementation of the
recommended mitigation measures.
AMO 2010 Government Historic Sites Identified by AMO. Hong Kong: AMO website.
AMO 2011(a) Declared
Monuments in Hong Kong (as of 24 June 2011), Hong Kong: AMO pamphlet.
AMO 2011(b) List of Historic Buildings in Building Assessment (as of 2 September
2011), Hong Kong: AMO website.
AMO 2012(c) List of Sites of Archaeological Interest in Hong Kong (as at Nov 2012),
Hong Kong: AMO pamphlet.
CEDD 2011 Catalogue of Hong Kong Tunnels (up to April 2011), CEDD website online
document.
Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Ltd. 2011 SCL – NEX/2206 EIA Study for Tai Wai to Hung Hom
Section.
EPD website
Hong
Kong and China Gas Company Ltd 2011 Project
Profile for Installation of 500mm NB Gas Pipelines inside the Existing Disused
Tunnel (Old Beacon Hill Tunnel), Hong Kong: Hong Kong and China Gas Company .
MTR
2010 One Hundred Years of Railway
Operational in Hong Kong: Hong Kong Railways, Past, Present and Future,
Hong Kong: Heritage Museum.
高添強 1995 《香港戰地指南》香港，三聯書店。
~ End of
Section 10 ~
[1]
AMO 2012 List of Sites of Archaeological
Interest in Hong Kong (as at Nov 2012). Hong Kong: AMO pamphlet.
[2] Some maps spelt the village as “Kang-hau” with an “a”.
[3] AMO 2011 Declared
Monuments in Hong Kong (as of 24 June 2011). AMO
pamphlet.
[4] AMO 2011 List
of Historic Buildings in Building Assessment (as of 23 November 2011). AMO website.
[5] Ove
Arup & Partners Hong Kong Ltd. 2011 SCL
– NEX/2206 EIA Study for Tai Wai to Hung Hom Section. EPD website
[6] AMO
2010 Government Historic Sites Identified
by AMO. AMO website.
[7] CEDD 2011 Catalogue of Hong Kong Tunnels (up to April
2011).
CEDD website online document.
[8] Hong Kong and
China Gas Company Ltd 2011 Project
Profile for Installation of 500mm NB Gas Pipelines inside the Existing Disused
Tunnel (Old Beacon Hill Tunnel).
[9] Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Ltd. 2011 SCL – NEX/2206 EIA Study for Tai Wai to Hung Hom Section. EPD website