12
Cultural Heritage IMPACT ASSESSMENT
This Section presents the results of the Cultural
Heritage Impact Assessment for the proposed construction and operation of the
offshore wind farm. A literature review has been conducted to
establish baseline cultural heritage conditions in the terrestrial and marine
environment. In addition, a Marine
Archaeological Investigation has been undertaken to identify the location of
any unknown archaeology.
The Study Area for the terrestrial archaeological
assessment included areas within 100 m from the boundary of onshore cabling
works. The Study Area for the
marine archaeological investigation included the seabed that will be affected
by the marine works being proposed.
12.2
Legislative
Requirements and Evaluation Criteria
The following legislation and guidelines are
applicable to the assessment of cultural heritage and archaeological sites in
·
Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance
(Cap. 499) and the associated Technical Memorandum on the EIA Process (EIAO-TM);
·
Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (AM Ordinance)
(Cap. 53);
·
·
Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Impact
Assessment prepared by the Antiquities and Monuments Office (AMO); and
·
Guidelines for Marine Archaeological
Investigation prepared by AMO.
12.2.1
Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance
Technical Memorandum on the EIA Process
The EIAO-TM
outlines the approaches required in investigating and assessing the impacts on
archaeological sites. In
particular, the EIA considered criteria set out in Annexes 10 and 19.
12.2.2
Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance, Cap.
53
The AM
Ordinance provides statutory protection against the threat of development
on Declared Monuments, historical buildings and archaeological sites to enable their
preservation for posterity. The AM Ordinance also establishes the
statutory procedures to be followed in making such a declaration.
“This Ordinance provides for
the preservation of objects of historical, archaeological and paleontological
interest…”
The AM
Ordinance defines an antiquity as a relic (a movable object made before
1800) and a place, building, site or structure erected, formed or built by
human agency before the year 1800.
The AM Ordinance also states, amongst other things, that the
discovery of an antiquity shall be reported to the Authority (Secretary for
Development); that ownership of all relics discovered after 1976 shall be
vested in the Government; that the Authority can declare a place, building,
site or structure to be a monument, historical building or archaeological or
paleontological site or structure (and therefore introducing certain additional
controls for these sites); and that licences and permits can be granted for
excavation and for other work.
Over the years, surveys have been undertaken to
identify archaeological sites in
Section 11 of the AM
Ordinance requires any person who discovers an antiquity, or supposed
antiquity, to report the discovery to the Antiquities Authority. By implication, construction projects
need to ensure that the Antiquities Authority, the Antiquities Advisory Board
(AAB) ([1]), is formally notified of archaeological
resource which are discovered during the assessment or construction of a
project.
12.2.3
Chapter 10, Conservation, of the HKPSG
provides general guidelines and measures for the conservation of historical
buildings, archaeological sites and other antiquities.
12.2.4
Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Guidelines
Guidelines for Cultural
Heritage Impact Assessment
detail the standard practice, procedures and methodology which must be
undertaken in determining the cultural heritage resources potentially impacted
by developments and defining suitable mitigation measures to be adopted (see Appendix C of the EIA Study Brief
ESB-151/2006).
12.2.5
Marine Archaeological Investigation
Guidelines
Guidelines
for Marine Archaeological Investigation detail the standard practice, procedures and
methodology which must be undertaken in determining marine archaeological
potential. Guidelines for
determining the presence of archaeological artefacts and defining suitable
mitigation measures can be found in Appendix C of EIA Study Brief ESB-151/2006.
Baseline review, geophysical survey and establishing archaeological
potential are considered the first stage of a Marine Archaeological
Investigation. Subject to the results
of the first stage Marine Archaeological Investigation, further investigation
may or may not be required.
12.3
Assessment
Methodology for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
A
desk-based review was undertaken to identify terrestrial cultural heritage
resources as defined in appropriate guidelines (see Table 12.1) and archaeological interest features.
Table 12.1 Categories
of Cultural Heritage Resources
|
Categories |
Description |
Sub-Category |
|
Declared
Monuments |
Statutorily
protected against the threat of development under the Antiquities and
Monuments Ordinance (AM Ordinance) to enable preservation for posterity. |
Nil
|
|
Graded
Historic Buildings |
Graded
by the Antiquities Advisory Board (AAB) based on an internal guidelines
adopted by the AAB and the Antiquities and Monuments Office (AMO) for the
preservation of historic buildings. |
Grade
I - Buildings of outstanding merit, which every effort should be made to
preserve if possible. Grade
II - Buildings of special merit; efforts should be made to selectively
preserve. Grade
III - Buildings of some merit: preservation in some form would be desirable
and alternative means could be considered if preservation is not
practicable. |
|
Government
Historic Sites |
Historic
sites owned by the government identified by AMO as heritage sites. |
Nil |
|
Archaeological
Sites |
Sites
with archaeological interest listed by AMO. |
Nil |
|
Other
Cultural Heritage Sites |
Cultural
heritage resources falling outside the above categories but need to be
addressed within the Study Area boundary in accordance with Section 1.1(a) of
the CHIA. |
Historic
Buildings and Structures; Landscape
Features; Areas
of Archaeological Potential |
The
desktop study also identified the potential for marine archaeological sites
within the Study Area.
In
addition, a geophysical survey has been conducted by the project proponent and
the survey data has been reviewed by a qualified marine archaeologist to locate
and define any sites of archaeological potential within the Study Area.
Information
was obtained from references available over the internet, the Hong Kong
Heritage Discovery Centre Reference Library, the United Kingdom Hydrographic Office ‘Wreck’ files and various government
departments, public libraries and libraries from tertiary institutions.
12.4.1
Terrestrial Resources and Archaeology
The landing site of the submarine cable will be at
the Lamma Power Station seawall area. No declared monuments, graded historic
buildings, government historic sites and archaeological sites listed by AMO have been identified within or
adjacent to the proposed works. In
addition, there are no known archaeological interest features present at the
recently reclaimed Lamma Power Station Extension.
12.4.2
Marine Archaeology
Desk-top Literature Review
Coates ([2]) stated that ‘Definite
archaeological traces of prehistoric activity have been found on the beach at Shek Pik, on the south coast of Lantao [Lantau]
Thirteen (13) archaeological sites and many
archaeological finds have been recorded on Lamma
Island which although would not be affected by the wind farm could indicate
some interest in the offshore area within or adjacent to the footprint of the
wind farm and cable route. Studies
show a rich heritage on the island, including thirteen archaeological
sites. Artefacts of note include
lime kilns, shells, animal bones, ancient cultural relics, bronze weapons,
bronze axe moulds, burials and a special ‘Yazhang’, a
jade object from ritual purposes, which indicates that 3,000 years ago, the
coastal area of Southern China had a cultural connection with the
The sediments of the Late Holocene period, considered
to be relatively homogenous very soft to soft silty
clay and with high moisture content, offers the greatest potential (as compared
to the surface of the seabed which is often found to have been disturbed by
fishing and other shipping related activities) to include well preserved
remains associated with the occupation and use of the islands in Hong Kong
waters. These remains could include
shipwrecks. In the Study Area marine deposits vary in thickness from 2 metres
to about 15 metres.
The United Kingdom Hydrographic
Office in
·
ABEY: The wreck has been previously reported but not
detected by survey, leading to doubts about its reported position or existence;
·
DEAD: The wreck has not detected by repeated surveys,
therefore considered not to exist;
·
LIFT: A salvaged wreck; and
·
LIVE: All other wrecks, charted or uncharted.
Annex 12C provides a list of these sites adjacent to the proposed
development. A total of four
shipwrecks / undefined sites were found.
Three of these wrecks are classified as ‘Live’ and one wreck is
classified as ‘Dead’. The nearest
site (Wreck No. 60016) is located 328 m southeast from the proposed cable
route. However, this wreck is
classified as ‘Dead’. The remaining
sites are located over 1.4 km from the proposed cable route or the wind farm
site. Figure 12.1 shows
the location of these wreck sites.
Geophysical Survey
The objective of the geophysical survey (an
investigation of the bathymetry, seabed features
and geology) was to define
the areas/sites of greatest archaeological potential and map any seabed and
sub-bottom anomalies which may be archaeological material.
On 27 and 28 March 2009 EGS (
The equipment used during the
survey included:
·
DGPS positioning and navigation, provided by the C-NAV
GcGPS 2000 system, and C-View NAV Navigation
software;
·
Knudsen 320m echo sounder used to collect depth
soundings;
·
Reson 8125 multibeam echo
sounder
·
DF 1000 side scan sonar system (employing a dual
frequency system with nominal operating frequencies of 100 kHz and 500 kHz) and
digital tow fish, used to map seabed features;
·
C-Boom low voltage boomer system, used to provide profiles of seabed
sediments; and
·
C-View logging systems.
The geophysical survey data obtained by EGS were
processed by in house geophysicists and reviewed by an experienced marine
archaeologist. Annex 12B
provides the location of geophysical survey tracts and results of the
survey.
The geophysical survey showed how the seabed in the
Study Area has been impacted by anchoring, trawling and dumping of materials
(see Figures 12.2 and 12.3). Some Sonar Contacts were identified as
debris/dumped material and this was confirmed through the review by the marine
archaeologist (see Figure 12.3).
Figure 12.2 Seabed
scar from an anchor dragging along the seabed
|
|
Figure 12.3 Dumped
materials on top of seabed scarring from anchors and mixed with other trawling
and anchoring scars
|
|
In addition, the geophysical survey identified a
Sonar Contact located 72 metres west of the proposed cable joining two wind turbines,
which has been interpreted as a shipwreck (see Table 12.2). Figure 12.4 shows an image of the
shipwreck and Figure 12.5 shows its
position in relation to the proposed wind farm. Although the shipwreck is located in the
general wind farm development area, it lies outside of the footprint of any
works. As stated in Section 5, the proposed width of seabed
disturbance for the installation of the submarine cable is a maximum of 0.3 m (for
jetting works) and therefore will not be impacted by the proposed works. If a decision is made to relocate the
position of turbines during Detailed Design, the maximum width of disturbance
from the construction of wind turbines will be 15 m in any direction from the
centre point of the turbine (including scour protection which will has an
overall width of 30 m), which means that any disturbance to this feature can be
easily avoided. Therefore no
disturbance to this feature is anticipated as result of the proposed wind farm
development.
Table 12.2 Sonar
Contact (Wreck) near the wind farm
|
Contact ID |
Latitude Longitude |
Easting Northing |
Offset from |
Dimensions (m) |
Description |
|
Lamma SC001 |
22° 10.132' N 114° 4.207' E |
825257.0E 803379.7N |
72m W |
13.3m x 4.6m x
0.7m |
Wreck |
Figure 12.4 Image
of the shipwreck SC001
|
|
The only signs of sub-bottom anomalies within the
proposed area of development were submarine cables. Figure
12.6 provides an illustration of a submarine cable contact found during the
marine archaeological investigation.
Figure 12.6 Submarine
Cable
|
|
12.5
Cultural Heritage
Impact Assessment Methodology
As discussed above, a desktop literature
review was conducted in order to establish the cultural heritage importance of
the area surrounding the proposed wind farm and cable route. This has been supplemented by a Marine
Archaeological Investigation in those areas that could be affected by works.
The importance of potentially impacted
cultural heritage was assessed using the approach described in the EIAO-TM. The potential impacts due to the
construction and operation of the Project and associated developments were then
assessed (with reference to the EIAO-TM
Annex 10 guidelines) and the impacts evaluated (with reference to the
criteria in EIAO-TM Annex 19).
12.6
Identification of
Cultural Heritage Impacts
The construction activities associated with the
proposed Project that have the potential to cause impacts to cultural heritage
features are:
·
Cable
trenching on land to install cables to the Switching Station;
·
Installation
of turbine and wind monitoring mast foundations; and
·
Dredging
and jetting associated with the installation of the submarine cables.
No potential impacts are identified with respect to
the operation phase of the offshore wind farm.
The following
provides a discussion of the potential construction impacts with respect to
terrestrial and marine archaeology.
12.7.1
Construction Phase
Terrestrial Archaeology/Heritage
The desk-top review has identified no known cultural
heritage resources in the vicinity of the proposed onshore cable route. In addition, the reclaimed land where
the cable circuit will be located is not considered to have any archaeological
potential. Therefore no
construction impacts are expected.
Marine Archaeology
The review of historical documents and literature
indicates that the Study Area has the potential to contain archaeological
material although no evidence was found as to specific sites contained within
the Study Area. An investigation of
the UKHO Wrecks database determined that Wreck No. 60016 is located 328 m
southeast from the proposed cable route.
However, this wreck is classified as ‘Dead’ and is therefore not
considered to exist. However,
disturbance to a wreck in this area would be avoided during construction. No other wrecks were identified during
the baseline review that could be affected by the construction or operation of
the proposed offshore wind farm development.
The geophysical surveys found only one shipwreck, at a distance of
72 m from the wind farm. As stated
above, no disturbance to this feature is anticipated as result of the proposed
wind farm development under the current design arrangements. If design arrangements change during the
subsequent Detailed Design Phase then direct impacts on this vessel should be
avoided. It is suggested that no
works or structures are developed within 50 m of the wreck to safeguard any
potential cultural heritage interest.
No further consideration of the archaeological value of this wreck is
therefore required. There are also
numerous signs of seabed disturbances from anchoring, trawling and the recent
dumping of materials. Submarine
cables were the only signs of sub-bottom anomalies in the surveyed area.
The installation of the cable from
12.8
Mitigation Measures
Construction impacts on archaeological/heritage
features have been avoided and minimised through the planning and design of the
works. No additional mitigation is
required.
12.9
Environmental
Monitoring and Audit (EM&A)
As it is concluded that no archaeological material
will be impacted by this Project no further marine archaeological investigation
is required. The avoidance of
direct impacts to the shipwreck identified during the geophysical survey will
be verified by the Environmental Team and the Independent Environmental Checker
through review of the final design prior to the installation of turbines and
submarine cable. Designs will be
checked to ensure that no works will occur within 50 m of the shipwreck.
12.10
Residual
Environmental Impacts
No residual impacts are anticipated associated with
the proposed development of the offshore wind farm.
Existing information indicates that no other projects
are committed or planned in the area that could lead to cumulative
impacts. In addition, as no impacts
on archaeology have been identified with respect to this Project, no cumulative
impacts would be expected.
The desk-top literature review has identified no
terrestrial archaeological features that would be affected by the proposed
offshore wind farm development. No
further terrestrial archaeological investigation was considered necessary. The desk-top literature review also
determined that no wrecks would be affected by the works. However, potential for marine
archaeology in the proposed development area was identified. A Marine Archaeological Investigation
was undertaken in the areas that could be affected by the proposed construction
works. This investigation
determined that no marine archaeological features would be impacted by the
works and no further investigation is necessary.
In summary, no impacts are
expected on terrestrial and marine cultural heritage feature.