7.1 Introduction
The Study Brief specifically requires an
assessment of cultural heritage impacts arising from the project. This section presents the results of the
assessment of potential impacts on cultural heritage resources as a result of
construction and operational activities based on the circuit alignment shown in
the Study Brief No. ESB-057-200.
Mitigation measures required to ameliorate the potential impacts to
acceptable levels have been recommended, where appropriate.
7.2 Environmental Legislation, Policies, Standards and Criteria
The following legislation is applicable
to the assessment of archaeological and cultural heritage resources in Hong
Kong:
(i)
Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (Cap. 499 S16) Technical Memorandum on the Environmental Impact Assessment Process,
Annexes 10 and 19 (EIA-TM);
(ii)
Antiquities
and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53); and
(iii) Hong
Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG).
7.3 Assessment Methodology
7.3.1 Desktop Study
A desktop search was undertaken to
compile a comprehensive inventory of the heritage resources within the project
area. The search included the review of archive information held by the
Antiquities and Monuments Office, public libraries, tertiary institutions and
other government departments. The full
bibliography is presented in the end of this section.
7.3.2 Field investigation
Field surveys
hasve
been undertaken to assemble necessary data where the above sources of
information were inadequate. An archaeological
investigation to check for any archaeological remains at the areas as specified
in the Study Brief was undertaken by a qualified archaeologist. The methodology for the field investigation
was agreed with Antiquities and Monument Office (AMO).
7.3.3 Impact Assessment
Preservation in totality is taken as the
first priority and the assessment has taken into account the requirement as
specified in the Study Brief, Clause 3.11 and Section 2.1 of Annex 10
and Sections 2.6 to 2.14 of Annex 19 of the EIA-TM.
7.4 Baseline
Conditions
The cultural heritage resources within
the study area of the Project have been identified and they are presented
below:
7.4.1 Historical Buildings and Features
No declared/deemed monuments or graded
buildings have been identified.
However, a number of listed historical buildings and features were
identified, and one new site, considered to be of historical note, the Wing On
Bridge and its associated earth god shrine, was also identified during the
survey. All the buildings and features
are located in Pui O. The location of these sites is shown in Figure 7.1 and the detail is provided
in Table 7-1 below:
Table 7-11 Historical
Building and Features at Pui O
|
Site |
Description |
Closest
Distance from the circuit alignment Section 1 |
|
Pui
O Lo Wai Tsuen* |
17
sites are listed by AMO[1] |
44
m |
|
Ham
Tin San Tsuen* |
1
site is listed by AMO[2] |
56
m |
|
Ham
Tin Kau Tsuen* |
11
sites are listed by AMO[3]. |
103
m |
|
Pui
O Tin Hau Temple |
listed
by AMO[4].
It is a two-hall type temple with a covered courtyard. Built over 200 years ago although a number
of renovation have been undertaken in 1799, 1974 and 1995. Two fung shui trees are located to the left
and right of the temple as shown in Figure
7.2 and an earth god shrine is identified at the fung shui
tree to the right of the temple. |
10
m from temple but 4 m from the platform in front of the temple |
|
Wing
On Bridge and its associated earth god shrine |
A
granite block bridge in the 19th century to 20th
century. A concrete shrine is located
to the western end of the bridge which is inscribed as “Wing On Bridge God
shrine” (see Figures 7.1
and 7.3 for
location and the photographic record of the site). |
19
m |
*
The buildings are mainly village
houses, some of them are ancestral halls or places of worship; these buildings
range from 50 to over 100 years old.
7.4.2 Archaeological Resources
Two archaeological sites, Tai Long Wan
and Pui O archaeological sites, are listed by the AMO within the study area of
the Project (Figure 7.4 for
location). The sites are as follows:
·
Tai Long
Wan site was first discovered in the 1930s and defined by W. Schofield as an
archaeological site in 1940. Excavation
results were reported by L. Berry and S.M. Bard in 1956, at that time leader of
the Archaeological Team of Hong Kong University. The team collected 13 stone adzes on the east hillslope of the
site. During 1967 - 1982, the Hong Kong
Archaeological Society excavated 30 grids at the raised beach and on the
eastern hillslope. The Society identified
a black coloured layer in the raised beach which was dated to the Bronze
Age. In 1982-83, B.A.V. Peacock and
T.J.P. Nixon undertook further investigation at the site and identified late
Neolithic and Bronze Age artifacts during surface collection and discovered
lime kiln features during test pit excavation.
·
The Pui O
site was first discovered by the Archaeology Team of the Hong Kong University
in 1957 when debris from lime kilns were found. The site was then excavated by the Hong Kong Archaeological
Society in October 1983. Lime kiln
structures, a slaking structure, two sets of Tang dynasty pottery shards and
three Qing dynasty (mid to late 19th century) burials were
discovered. B.A.V. Peacock and T.J.P.
Nixon visited Pui O site five times during 1982-83 and prehistoric coarseware
shards at a south hillslope of Chi Ma Wan Road in Ham Tin were collected. In 1997, the Territory Wide Archaeological
Survey for South Lantau undertaken by Dr. P. L. Dreweet of London University
sank eight auger holes at the sandbar of the Pui O archaeological site, but
only one pottery shard (date of the pottery was not provided) was identified.
7.4.3 Archaeological Investigation Result
The Study Brief specifically requires an
archaeological investigation to check for any archaeological remains in the
follow areas:
·
along the
proposed alignment of the cable trench section located within Pui O
archaeological site; and
·
the
proposed reclamation temporary working
platform site at Pui O Wan for a works area for
the cable portal.
Prior to the commencement of the required
survey, the scope of work and methodology for the investigation was agreed with
AMO.
Field Walking
The whole proposed cable alignment was
field walked including areas at Pui O, Ham Tin and Tai Long Wan. As nothing of interest was identified at
section 2-5 from the landform, superficial geology investigation and field
walking result, the proposed cable alignment section 2-5 is considered to have
no archaeological potential from sections 2-5.
However, archaeological interest was identified in section 1:
Having field walked section 1, two areas
are identified of archaeological interest at two inner raised beach and Ham Tin
valley and further intensive surface collection was undertaken at the inner
raised beach of Pui O and Ham Tin valley.
Fly tipping at the north section of the inner raised beach at Pui O
hampered the field walking. In
addition, the area has been developed to provide infrastructure and facilities
including a school, playground, electricity cables and the Chi Ma Wan
Road. As a result of this extensive
disturbance, no artifacts are identified.
Quartz flakes, net pattern, double F
pattern and cord pattern pottery shards were found on the northern hillslope at
Chi Ma Wan Road in Ham Tin (Figure 7.5). These artifacts could date back to Late
Neolithic to Bronze Age (ca. 5000 BC to 1500 BC). The deposit area is defined as Site C in Figure 7.6.
Augering
On the basis of the fieldwalking result,
25 auger holes were bored at three areas of archaeological potential (Figure 7.6 for location):
·
a raised
beach area at Bui O Public School (Site A);
·
the inner
raised beach at Pui O (Site B); and
·
the south
of the Ham Tin valley.
A summary of the augering results isare
presented below. Four representative
auger holes were selected to present the vertical sequence at the three areas
and they are detailed in Appendix H.
An ancient cultural layer may exist at
Sites A and B. However, no artifacts
were identified during the augering.
The south of the Ham Tin valley shows no
archaeological potential except the area where late Neolithic to Bronze Age
artifacts were identified in surface collection.
Test Pit excavation
Two test pits were excavated:
·
Test Pit
(TP)1 at Pui O inner raised beach (Site B), measuring 3 m x 2.5 m in size; and
·
Test Pit
(TP)2 at Ham Tin valley, measuring 1 m x 1.5 m in size.
A summary of the excavation results is
presented below and detailed in Appendix
H.
·
TP 1: The
datable material from TP1 is a brass button discovered in C4 (Context 4). This kind of button belongs to the
Qing dynasty style for both male and female clothing. However, this style of button was common until the 1920s. The button probably came from burial
clothing. Oral information provided by
a local villager at Lantau indicated that inner raised beach or coastal areas
were used as public cemeteries on Lantau before the 1950s and these areas were
used as burial sites during World War II for children, unmarried people or
people killed in accidents. Four Qing
dynasty burials with associated coins were identified at the eastern end of a
test pit, Grid E, during previous archaeological excavations. Therefore, this inner raised beach area is
believed to have been used as a burial site from the late 17th
century until the end of World War II.
The soil profile of TP1 is similar to the
test pits excavated in 1983. C5 of TP1
is a layer of dark brown fine sand.
This layer contains large amount of pumice (or pumice-like materials) at
a highest elevation of 4.2 to 4.6 mPD.
This pumice or pumice-like materials is probably a slag of lime from
lime kilns identified during previous excavation. Such a layer was also
identified in six test pits out of seven during previous excavations in 1983,
dated to the Tang dynasty (618-907) (Meacham 1984, Yim 1984). However, only a small quantity of the
pumice were identified in C5 of TP1.
·
TP2:
Although roof tiles, broken grey bricks, blue-and-white porcelain bowl rim
shards and village ware shards were identified in C2, C4 and C6 in TP2, they
appear to be fill materials. This
conclusion is supported by oral information provided by a villager living near
the Pui O Tin Hau Temple. The Pui O Tin
Hau Temple near TP2 had been abandoned during the 1970s and rebuilt in
1980s. During previous renovation, the
broken brick and porcelain was dumped at the lower level area along the Chi Ma
Wan Road. Therefore, it is likely that
the artifacts identified in TP2 came from Pui O Tin Hau Temple. The original ground level before the fill
should be at around 4.23 mPD. Therefore, although the artifacts identified may
date back to over 100 years, since they were redeposited as fill in the TP2
area, and they are regarded as secondary deposit, and therefore, their
archaeological significance is very low.
Summary
Having field walked, augered and
excavated within the survey area, three areas were identified to have
archaeological potential:
1)
Site A:
Although no artifacts were identified at Site A, the soil profile at Bui O
Public School area prove that it is a raised beach with a ground level between
6.58 to 6.80 mPD, and a layer of brown fine sand mixed with small pieces of
pumice (or pumice-like materials) was identified in AH09 at 1.2 m below
existing ground level. This layer is
similar to the Tang dynasty layer Site B.
Therefore, although land ownership prevented trial pit excavations in
this area, this site is considered of archaeological potential. (refer to Appendix H for the augering result of
AH09).
2)
Site B: Pui
O inner raised beach is part of the well known Pui O archaeological site since
1957 when Tang dynasty lime kiln features were identified. The inner raised beach is believed to be the
core archaeological deposit area and the existing ground level of this raised
beach ranges from 6.2 to 6.9 mPD.
According to the investigation results from six augering holes and one 3
x 2.5 test pit, the highest level of the Tang dynasty cultural layer is
probably between 4.38 to 4.9 mPD and the lowest level of the layer is
approximate 3.82 to 4.6 mPD. (Figure 7.6)
3)
Ham Tin
Valley: No archaeological potential is expected for the proposed circuit
alignment along Chi Ma Wan Road at Ham Tin.
However, the northern hillslope of the Ham Tin valley is of
archaeological potential where Bronze Age pottery shards and man-made quartz
flakes were collected. The Bronze age
site boundary is shown in Figure 7.6.
For the remaining sections 2 to 5 of the
proposed circuit alignment, no archaeological potential is expected.
7.5 Impact
Assessment
7.5.1 Potential Sources of Impact
Potential impacts on the identified
cultural heritage resources within the Study Area may arise from the following:
·
Landtake
for both temporary and permanent facilities which may result in damage to, or
loss of, archaeological remains and deposits;
·
Construction
works may result in damage to or loss of buried archaeological sites by
disturbance through excavation at or near an archaeological site, topsoil
stripping and the passage of heavy machinery on exposed and buried deposits;
and
·
Indirect
impacts such as visual and noise intrusion on the setting and amenity of
historic and cultural resources. These
are addressed in other sections of this report.
7.5.2 Evaluation of Impact
No known culture heritage resources will
be directly impacted by the proposed circuit alignment sections 2 to 5 as
described in the Study Brief, Clause 1.2
(ie from Pui O Beach to Cheung Chau North Substation).
Although the Tai Long Wan archaeological
site is located close to the circuit alignment, the circuit alignment is
located outside the site boundary where no archaeological potential is
expected, therefore, no impact is expected.
Section 1 (the underground cable section
from Pui O Station to Pui O Beach) may impact cultural heritage resources as
follows:
Although none of the identified
historical buildings and features are to be directly impacted by circuit
alignment section 1. Potential indirect
air, noise and visual impacts may arise from the construction work. However, the historical buildings at Pui O
Lo Wai Tsuen, Ham Tin San Tsuen and Ham Tin Kau Tsuen are not the closest
buildings to the circuit alignment.
They are not defined as air, noise and visual impact sensitive
receivers. Therefore, the indirect
impact is considered not significant provided that reference is made to the
relevant air, noise and visual impact assessments for this study.
Wing On Bridge is located 19 m from the
circuit alignment, at the opposite shore of a stream next to Chi Ma Wan Road to
the east of Ham Tin San Tsuen, and thus no impact is expected.
Since the circuit alignment is located at
the Chi Ma Wan Road, 4 m from the platform in front of Pui O Tin Hau Temple and
the scale of construction work is considered small, no direct impact is
expected.
There is no archaeological potential
along the circuit alignment at Ham Tin, therefore, no impact is expected.
Potential direct impact on the potential
archaeological deposit at Bui O Public School area (Site A) may arise due to
the construction of the underground circuit alignment. However, since the circuit alignment follows
the existing road alignment where previous development is expected to have
destroyed any archaeological deposit, if any, to an unknown level and no
artifacts were identified in this area, the potential impact is considered
low. Thus, in view of the small scale
of construction work involved, and the existing condition of the archaeological
deposit, the impact is considered minimal and acceptable provided that the
mitigation measures as described in Section
7.6 is implemented.
The archaeological deposit at Pui O inner
raised beach (Site B) could also be affected by the construction works. Although a layer associated with Qing
dynasty to early and mid 20th century burial has been identified,
previous development such as the construction the playground and other
infrastructure including Chi Ma Wan Road and electricity cables have disturbed
and destroyed this layer to an unknown level.
The significance of preservation in
situ of this layer is not relevant and the impact on this layer is
considered acceptable. With regard to
the Tang dynasty layer, the underground trench to be dug to lay the circuit is
about 1 to 1.7 m in depth, therefore, the construction work may or may not
reach the Tang dynasty layer. The
impact is considered avoidable provided that mitigation measure recommended in Section 7.6 is implemented.
7.6 Recommended
Mitigation Measures
The indirect air and noise impact on Pui
O Tin Hau Temple will require consultation with villagers to identify peak
visiting periods to the temple, such as festival days, to avoid construction
works to be undertaken at those times.
The relevant air and noise assessment at the Tin Hau Temple area is
presented in relevant sections of this report.
In order to avoid reaching the core area
of the sandbar at BPui
O Public School area (Site A), it is recommended to keep the circuit alignment
as east as possible at the margin of the sandbar near the junction between
South Lantau Road and Chi Ma Wan Road to minimise the direct impact. It is also recommended that the trench to be
dug out to lay the cable should follow the existing road and does not penetrate
into the ‘no-dig’ zone as defined by AMO to avoid reaching the original ground
surface which may contain the cultural remains from the lime kilns.
With regard to the direct impact on the
inner raised beach at Pui O (Site B), it two
options of recommendation is provided:
(1) Re-align this section of
the alignment to the north, outside the Site B. This is the preferred option according to the EIA-TM. If it is not practical, Option 2 is
recommended.
(2) Preservation in situ of
the Tang dynasty layer is recommended thatand
therefore the detail design of the underground cable construction
should not allow any disturbance of the Tang dynasty layer (4.38 - 4.9 mPD),
which is 1.5 m from existing ground level (6.2 - 6.9 mPD) within this section.
The
future levels of the proposed Chi Ma Wan Road widening
implemented by Highways department need to be carefully designed to
allow for the minimum 1000 mm cover for the cables, which shall be laid above
the Tang dynasty layer or the `no dig’ zone as defined by AMO. If the cover requirement
cannot be achieved, approval from Highway Department should be sought in
advance for allowing the cables to be laid in a shallow depth with additional
protection such as concrete surround to protect the cables.
7.7 Environmental Monitoring
& Audit
The recommended mitigation measure
of avoiding the cultural layer in sites A and B is expected to prevent
damage to the existing archaeological deposits. However, as a precautionary measure arising from the possibility
that the level of the cultural layer may vary from point-to-point it is
recommended that archaeological monitoring is undertaken in the sections
within the Pui O Archaeological Site during construction to preserve the
archaeological deposit, if any, by record and take environmental samples for
future study if necessary. The
construction contractor should cooperate with a qualified archaeologist
appointed to undertake the monitoring to allow sufficient time for recording
archaeological deposit and take environmental samples if necessary.
7.8 Conclusions
Literature reviews of existing
information supplemented with the results of field surveys on cultural heritage
resources indicate that 31 historical buildings and features and two known
archaeological sites are located within the Study Area. The proposed development has tried to avoid
the heritage sites as far as possible but concerns have been raised regarding
the potential impact on some of the identified sites.
Mitigation measures have been recommended
to avoid impacts to cultural heritage resources; control of the construction
work schedule during peak visiting hour at Pui O Tin Hau Temple; detail design
of the underground cable construction to avoid and minimise the potential
impact to the archaeological deposit at Bui O Public School (Site A) and inner
raised beach at Pui O (Site B). The
future road level of the proposed Chi Ma Wan Road widening shall be raised to
allow adequate cover requirement for the cables which shall be laid above the concerned
zone. If
the avoidance of reaching the `no dig’ zone below existing ground level at Pui O
Archaeological Site both Site A and Site B is
not possible, archaeological monitoring should be undertaken in this section
during construction to preserve the archaeological deposit, if any, by record
and take environmental samples for future study if necessary. The level of `no dig’
zone shall be agreed with AMO during the detailed design stage of the cable
laying works. The construction contractor should cooperate with a
qualified archaeologist appointed to undertake the monitoring to allow
sufficient time for recording archaeological deposit and take environmental
samples if necessary.
Bibliography
Antiquities
and Monuments Office, Archive Research File No. 780203, Pui O Archaeological
Site (unpublished)
Guofei
1573-1620 Yue Da Ji vol. 32 (in Chinese)
Meacham, W. 1984 Pui O , Journal of
the Hong Kong Archaeological Society, vol.X. Hong Kong Archaeological
Society, Hong Kong.p60-69
Langford,
R.L. and others 1995 Geology of Lantau District, Hong Kong
Geotechnical Engineering office.
Peacock,
B.A.V. and T.J.P. Nixion 1988 The Hong Kong Archaeological Survey:
Subsurface Investigation Reports, Antiquities and Monuments Office, Hong
Kong SAR.
Peacock,
B.A.V. and T.J.P. Nixion 1986 Report on
Hong Kong Archaeological Survey, Antiquities and Monuments Office, Hong
Kong SAR.
Siu,
Kwok-kin, 1994 The Society and History of
Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Educational
Publish Co. (in Chinese)
Yim,
W.W.S. 1984 Pumice-like Material at Pui O, Journal
of the Hong Kong Archaeological Society, vol.X. Hong Kong Archaeological
Society, Hong Kong.p72-75