Appendix A
Study Requirements of Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
(1) Baseline Study
1.1 A baseline study shall be conducted:
1.2 The baseline study shall also include a desk-top study and a field survey.
1.3. Desk-top research
1.3.1 Desk-top searches should be conducted to analyse, collect and collate extant information. They include:
1.4 Field Evaluation
1.4.1 The potential value of the development site with regard to the cultural heritage could be established easily where the site is well-documented. However, it does not mean that the site is devoid of interest if it lacks information. In these instances, a site visit combined with discussions with appropriate individuals or organisations should be conducted by those with expertise in the area of cultural heritage to clarify the position.
1.4.2 Historic buildings and structures survey
1.4.3 Archaeological Survey
Appropriate methods of field evaluation should be applied to assess the archaeological potential of the project area:
1.4.4 If the field evaluation identifies any additional sites of cultural heritage within the study area which are of potential historic or archaeological importance and not recorded by AMO, the office should be reported as soon as possible. The historic and archaeological value of the items will be further assessed by the AMO.
1.5 The Report of Baseline Study
1.5.1 The study report should have concrete evidence to show that the process of the above desk-top and field survey has been satisfactorily completed. This should take the form of a detailed inventory of the sites of cultural heritage supported by full description of their cultural significance. The description should contain detailed geographical, historical, archaeological, architectural, anthropological, ethnographic and other cultural data supplemented with illustrations below and photographic and cartographic records.
1.5.2 Historic Buildings and Structures
1.5.3 Archaeological Sites
1.5.4 A full bibliography and the source of information consulted should be provided to assist the evaluation of the quality of the evidence. It is expected that the study and result are up to an internationally accepted academic and professional standard.
(2) Impact Assessment
2.1 Cultural heritage impact assessment must be undertaken to identify the impacts of the sites of cultural heritage which will be affected by the proposed development subject to the result of desktop research and field evaluation. The prediction of impact and an evaluation of their significance must be undertaken by an expert in cultural heritage. During the assessment, both the direct impacts such as loss or damage of important features as well as indirect impacts such as change of water table levels which may affect the preservation of the archaeological and built heritage in situ should be stated. A detailed description and plans should be provided to elaborate to what extent the site of cultural heritage will be affected.
2.2 Preservation in totality must be taken as the first priority. Section 4.3.1(c), item 2 of Annex 10, items 2.6 to 2.9 of Annex 19 and other relevant parts of the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process shall be referred for the detailed requirements of the impact assessment.
(3) Mitigation Measures
3.1 It is always a good practice to recognise the site or monument early in the planning stage and site selection process, and to avoid it, i.e. preserve it in ¡V situ, or leaving a buffer zone around the site. Built heritage, sites and landscapes are to be in favour of preservation unless it can be shown that there is a need for a particular development which is of paramount importance and outweighs the significance of the heritage feature.
3.2 If avoidance of the cultural heritage is not possible, amelioration can be achieved by reduction of the potential impacts and the preservation of heritage features, such as physical relocating it. Measures like amendments of the sitting, screening and revision of the detailed design of the development are required to lessen its degree of exposure if it causes visual intrusion to the cultural heritage and affecting its character.
3.3 All the assessment should be conducted by an expert in cultural heritage.
3.4 Besides referring to paragraph 4.3.1(d), items 2.10 to 2.14 of Annex 19 and other relevant parts of the Technical Memorandum, proposals for mitigation measures should be accompanied with a master layout plan together with all detailed treatment, elevations, and landscape plan. A rescue programme, when required, shall be proposed which may involve preservation of the historical building or structure together with the relics inside, and its historic environment through relocation, detailed cartographic and photographic survey or preservation of an archaeological site "by record", i.e. through excavation to extract the maximum data as the very last resort.
3.5 The programme for implementation of agreed mitigation measures should be able to be implemented, and clearly stated in the EIA report, as required in Annex 20 of the Technical Memorandum. In particular, item 6.7 of Annex 20 requires the Applicant to define and list out clearly the proposed mitigation measures to be implemented, by whom, when, where, to what requirements and the various implementation responsibilities. A comprehensive plan and programme for the protection and conservation of the partially preserved Site of Cultural Heritage, if any, during the planning and design stage of the proposed project must be detailed.
END OF STUDY BRIEF
| Figures 1 to 14 | Appendix A |
[ Back to First Page ] / [ Back to Main Index ] / [ Legislative Framework ]