ISE22/15-16

• In December 2013, a large archaeological site with significant historical value was unexpectedly discovered at a construction site of the To Kwa Wan Station of the Shatin to Central Link ("SCL") scheduled for completion in 2020. Construction works were thus put on hold for some 11 months for archaeological fieldwork until late 2014, which eventually culminated in a final decision that the relics concerned would be mostly conserved in situ, and the rest by excavation.^{1Legend symbol denoting The archaeological discoveries in To Kwa Wan can be traced back to more than seven centuries ago. Findings identified for preservation in situ included some stone building features and a water channel. For preservation by excavation, they included pottery shards, coins and wooden structures.} According to the Government, conservation of these relics together with construction delay had resulted in additional project cost of at least HK$4.1 billion.^{2Legend symbol denoting The additional cost estimate made in December 2015 includes HK3.1 billion for the expanded archaeological work and HK$1 billion for the conservation work.}
• At the meeting of the Panel on Development held on 25 November 2014, members were concerned about how to strike a proper balance between heritage conservation and urban development. As England is renowned for its high public regard for history and archaeology, this issue of Essentials provides a quick overview on how this place preserves archaeological relics found in development projects which may serve as reference for Hong Kong.

Archaeological conservation policy in Hong Kong

• At present, there are two statutory ordinances on heritage conservation in Hong Kong, namely the Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53) enacted in 1976 and the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (Cap. 499) enacted in 1997.
• By and large, the former legislation regulates the discovery and excavation of antiquities, while the latter makes it mandatory for all designated projects covering large-scale infrastructure projects to conduct environmental impact assessment ("EIA") before project commencement. As an integral part of the study, EIA needs to incorporate heritage impact assessment ("HIA") as well. Environmental Protection Department is the enforcement and approving authority of EIA and responsible for issuing environmental permits to those projects meeting statutory requirements.
• In response to growing public concerns over a host of heritage issues, the Government conducted a review over heritage protection in 2007.^{3Legend symbol denoting The HIA initiative as well as the revitalizing historic buildings through partnership scheme were introduced in the 2007-2008 Policy Address as a response to the public concerns of a number of heritage conservation issues, including demolition of the Star Ferry Pier in Central. According to a Legislative Council brief in October 2007, the Government opined that introduction of a new piece of legislation would not be conducive to producing early success in heritage conservation work. See Development Bureau (2007).} The Government subsequently decided not to introduce a new heritage conservation ordinance as it was deemed to be a "long drawn process". Instead, it introduced a new administrative measure as from 2008, requiring all capital works projects approved by the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council to check with the Antiquities and Monuments Office ("AMO") in advance whether HIA is necessary. In other words, the HIA requirement extends from designated projects under the EIA Ordinance to capital works projects, some of which are of smaller scale.
• More specifically on HIA, project proponents need to include conservation management plan and protection measures to ensure that the heritage sites would not be damaged. This may involve revision of the project plan to preserve relics in situ (i.e. at original location). In case damage is deemed unavoidable, project proponents need to formulate mitigation measures to minimize the damage or to preserve the relics by excavation (i.e. recording and keeping them in other places). AMO is the approving authority of HIA.
• After completion of HIA, archaeological fieldwork may be required before construction of the development projects. If objects of archaeological significance are unearthed, project proponents should report to AMO. After on-site investigation, AMO will notify the Antiquities Advisory Board^{4Legend symbol denoting The Antiquities Advisory Board is a statutory body established in 1976 under the Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance. Its functions include advising the Antiquities Authority (i.e. the Secretary for Development) on: (a) whether a place, building, site or structure should be declared a monument or a proposed monument; (b) matters relating to antiquities, proposed monuments or monuments; and (c) measures to promote the conservation of Hong Kong's heritage.} which will advise the Antiquities Authority (i.e. Secretary for Development) on how to handle these archaeological relics.
• Despite the aforementioned statutory and administrative requirements and the best conservation efforts, sometimes objects of archaeological significance would be unearthed only after project commencement, as shown in the SCL case discussed above. For this case of unexpected discovery, how to handle them apparently gave rise to a number of public concerns, including (a) how to enhance the EIA procedure to mitigate the risks of finding archaeological sites after project commencement; (b) how to minimize the disruption to the projects caused by unexpected discovery in particular after project commencement; (c) whether there is adequate time for archaeological fieldwork for such unexpected archaeological discoveries; and (d) whether there is sufficient information to support the archaeological assessment.^{5Legend symbol denoting See Government Press Releases (2014a) and (2014b).}

Archaeological conservation policy in England

• In England, the government is aware of the dynamic relationship between development planning and archaeology, and revises its planning guidelines from time to time. In November 1990, the then Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions^{6Legend symbol denoting The former Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions and the former Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food were merged to form the current Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in 2001.} issued the Planning Policy Guidance 16 on "Archaeology and Planning", advising local authorities that all archaeological remains were finite and irreplaceable and they should be preserved in situ as far as practicable. This was a policy response after the strong public concerns over the unexpected discovery of the remains of Rose Theatre in London which was built in 1587 amid construction of a building in 1989.^{7Legend symbol denoting The Rose Theatre was a playhouse built in London in 1587, staging the performances of many plays, including the Shakespearean plays. The Theatre was closed down in 1605, but its foundation was unearthed in 1989. The unexpected discovery, largely attributed to the poor heritage assessment, triggered the government to review its guidance of archaeological management within the planning process. The Theatre is culturally significant as it is one of the only five Elizabethan theatres excavated in London, and the most complete and best preserved one with a comprehensive documentation of its histories.}
• In October 2010, this guidance was subsequently replaced by the Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide under the National Planning Policy Framework, followed by a series of guidance on "Historic Environment Good Practice Advice" published in 2015 by Historic England^{8Legend symbol denoting Historic England, a public body to look after the historic environment in England, is responsible for providing expertise advice on matters relating to the identification and preservation of cultural heritage.}, the national statutory body responsible for heritage matters. All these guidelines provide elaborate information on good practices related to archaeological management in the planning process. They also recognize the importance of heritage sites as "non-renewable resources" in achieving "sustainable development".
• For the local planning authorities in England, EIA is the most important policy instrument in heritage conservation. Under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011, all large scale development projects are required to conduct EIA and get approval from the local planning authorities. By and large, local planning policies in England display the following key features in terms of archaeological conservation:
  
  

  (a)	Accurate assessment as a preventive approach: To preempt unexpected discovery of archaeological relics after construction works have started, the EIA procedures in England place high importance on accurate impact assessment at an early stage.
  (b)	Official expertise advice at the early stage: Project proponents are strongly encouraged to get qualified archaeologists involved in EIA. Moreover, Historic England would offer advice on individual planning applications. At the regional level, the Local Government Archaeology Officers also work closely with the stakeholders to give advice on heritage issues.9Legend symbol denoting In the United Kingdom, the market of commercial archaeology is well established and there are about 5 400 archaeologists working in the sector. In Hong Kong, the need of development-led archaeology is thin, with very few archaeologists in the market. At present, there are about some 15 curatorial staff in the archaeology unit of AMO.
  (c)	Professional standard and guidance: The Chartered Institute for Archaeologists has developed a series of standard and guidance of desk-based assessment, field evaluation and geophysical survey to assist evidence-based assessment.
  (d)	Access to comprehensive database: Archaeologists rely on heritage database to identify the archaeological potential of a site. Heritage Gateway, an online database facilitating cross-search over 60 resources on archaeological sites and finds, historic buildings and landscapes, fieldwork and excavations records, and linked with a digital mapping system, is available to assist archaeological assessment.

• Notwithstanding the emphasis on accurate impact assessment in advance, unexpected discovery of relics could still happen after the start of the development projects. Under such cases, developers are encouraged to adopt mitigation measures to minimize the risk to the relics, including detailed guidelines on piling engineering methods issued by Historic England. Moreover, developers are recommended to take insurance against the risk of unforeseeable discoveries, offering protection to developers against project delays and cost overruns in case of unanticipated discovery of relics.^{10Legend symbol denoting A study found that the developers in the City of London were "anxious, nervous, concerned" and "terrified" about the possibility of disruption to programmes of the effects of archaeology on their developments. Insurance coverage helps ease these concerns. See City of London (2001).}
• As a case study, it is noted that the Crossrail project connecting the East and West London scheduled for completion in 2019 has unearthed more than 10 000 objects spanning 55 million years. After completion of the EIA study in 2005, all the archaeological objects unearthed during the construction stage up to now fall within expectation, without any unexpected discovery.^{11Legend symbol denoting There is no publicly available information on the archaeology cost of the Crossrail project. However, according to the Construction Industry Research and Information Association's report, it is indicated that for a central London development project with complex archaeological remains, total archaeological costs may comprise around 1% to 3% of the construction costs.} Here are a few success factors leading to the conservation of these relics without incurring additional development cost for unexpected discovery:
  
  

  (a)	Early expertise advice: The Museum of London Archaeology, an accredited member of the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists, has been appointed to provide archaeological assessment and field work services since 2003, well before the start of engineering design in late 2006. The project also gets support from other public bodies, including English Heritage and Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service12Legend symbol denoting Greater London Archaeology Advisory Service is a regional office under Historic England. It is responsible for advising the potential of the historic environment and the mitigation to conserve the potential archaeological heritage. The Advisory Service also manages over 72 000 historic environment records of the Greater London area. for advice in the design proposals;
  (b)	Contribution of archaeologists: Project proponent has appointed one archaeologist into the project management team, and another eight into the engineering design team. This enables archaeological issues to be taken on board in the engineering methods, time schedule and cost implications throughout the project planning and design stage;
  (c)	Buffer time for archaeological work: For those sites with high archaeological potential, the project allocated an extra 22-week for fieldwork in the work plan. For unexpected discovery of relics, at least 28 days of buffer time were allowed for excavation work, in case preservation in situ is not feasible. The excavation period can also be extended upon government request; and
  (d)	Public engagement: Throughout the archaeological work of the Crossrail project, relevant archaeological information was disseminated to the general public. Exhibitions, school visits and public tours were arranged to enhance the understanding of the local communities in development-led archaeology.

Observations

• While both Hong Kong and England require HIA in the planning approval framework, England appears to devote far more resources to HIA, including involvement of archaeologists, underpinned by detailed best practices and guidelines and intensive public engagement.

Prepared by Angela CHOI
Research Office
Information Services Division
Legislative Council Secretariat
12 July 2016