|
STAGE 2 - DETAILED IMPACT
ASSESSMENT
2A INTRODUCTION AND
OBJECTIVES
2B RESEARCH ACTIVITIES
2C INTENSIVE INVENTORY
1 Field Survey
2 Complete Survey
3 Sample Survey
4 Systematic Sampling
5 Judgmental Sampling
6 Basic Components of Site Surveying
7 Surface Survey
8 Subsurface Survey
9 Site Recording
2D SITE EVALUATION
1 Types of Significance
2 Information Sources
3 Evaluation Testing
4 Surface Collecting
5 Other Sources
2E IMPACT IDENTIFICATION AND
ASSESSMENT
1 Describing Impacts
2 Assessing Level of Effect
2F REPORT CONTENT AND RECOMMENDED
FORMAT
STAGE 2- DETAILED IMPACT
ASSESSMENT
2A INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES
For most proposed development projects,
detailed impact assessment is the standard procedure following the historic
resources overview study. The detailed impact assessment is designed to gain
the fullest possible understanding of the historic resource and its
interactions with the proposed development. The study shall define the
appropriate action to be taken, should the historic resources assessment
process proceed to Stage 3 and 4.
Normally, by Stage 2 in the project planning
process. various design alternatives have been assessed and subsequently
rejected in favour of a preferred project alternative. Although minor design
plan modifications are, in many cases, still viable considerations throughout
this stage, the area(s) of project impact should be relatively well defined.
These areas become the focus for detailed historic resources impact assessment
studies.
Detailed impact assessment should provide the
most comprehensive information possible for effectively managing endangered
historic resources before project implementation. The primary management
objectives of the assessment are to conduct appropriate field and laboratory
studies as necessary.
(a) to identify and evaluate historic
resources within the specified development project area(s),
(b) to identify and assess all impacts on
historic resources imposed by the development, and, based on the results of
these activities,
(c) to recommend viable alternatives or
options for managing unavoidable adverse impacts, including a preliminary
program for:
(i) implementing and scheduling these
impact management actions in Stage 3, and
(ii) where necessary, conducting
surveillance or 'impact monitoring', or both, in Stage 4.
The information provided by detailed impact
assessment is intended to assist the proponent in determining an optimum
approach to designing, planning, and managing the proposed development project
while giving appropriate consideration to historic resources.
In the course of fulfilling these basic
resource management objectives, it is usually possible to conduct
problem-oriented research aimed at enhancing public understanding and
appreciation of Newfoundland and Labrador's heritage. The effective and
responsible integration of both management and research needs is an especially
desirable quality of detailed impact assessment
design and should be recognised as an integral part of such projects.
Problem-oriented research objectives will vary
depending primarily on the particular nature of the proposed development and
the current state of research and resource management priorities and needs.
However, it should be appropriate to address problems relating to the range of
historic site variability or distribution, or to patterns of prehistoric or
historic settlement and land use. Problem-oriented research, within the
context of detailed impact assessment, will add credibility and confidence to
recommendations of the report and greatly facilitate its review.
2B RESEARCH ACTIVITIES
Intensive inventory, site evaluation, and
impact identification and assessment are the basic research activities at this
stage in the historic resource assessment process.
Normally, these studies will have been preceded
by adequate background research and preliminary field reconnaissance in Stage
1. It is particularly important to recognize that Stage 2 research builds
directly upon these latter studies. Moreover, the basic research design will
be significantly influenced by findings made in Stage 1.
The scope or level of intensity at which Stage
2 research activities should be undertaken will again vary depending on such
factors as the particular nature of the proposed development, the extent of
its probable impact, and the level or quality of previous historic and
archaeological studies conducted in the area. This latter factor is especially
true when designing the inventory survey strategy. The Historic Resources
Division will provide assistance in defining the most suitable level of study,
for specific development projects.
The importance of employing the services of
varied resource specialists at this stage of assessment cannot be overstated.
This is especially true of site evaluation. For obvious reasons, the
evaluation of any historic resource (e.g. archaeological, paleontological,
historical, or architectural) should be performed by individuals
professionally qualified in that particular field. The involvement of
investigators with varied expertise throughout this stage will help ensure
that potentially significant data are not inadvertently overlooked due to
inadequate treatment.
Finally, site evaluation and impact assessment
need not necessarily be undertaken for all recorded historic and
archaeological sites. These research activities are primarily intended for
sites characterized by unavoidable adverse impacts. They are not
required wherever the development proponent can ensure or guarantee the
protection of such sites by relocating or redesigning certain project
facilities, altering the level or intensity of development, or otherwise
avoiding adverse impacts. Historic sites within the project area which will be
avoided by land modifying actions are, for all practical purposes, exempt from
further consideration at this stage of assessment. However, these sites may be
of local importance for surveillance activity during project implementation
and operation (Stage 4). Any development project changes, designed to ensure
the protection of identified historic sites through avoidance, must be
rigorously documented in the historic resources impact assessment report.
2C INTENSIVE INVENTORY
Identification of historic resources is an
obvious prerequisite to site evaluation, impact assessment, and development of
a viable impact management plan. Thus, the initial step in a detailed impact
assessment is to compile a comprehensive inventory of historic sites occurring
within the area of project impact. The site inventory must be sufficiently
thorough to permit detailed, reliable statements to be made concerning the
relative density, distribution and categories of heritage sites within the
project area.
The inventory phase of research shall involve:
- field survey, designed to locate historic
sites in the field, and
- the complete, on-site recording or
documentation of each identified site.
2C.1 FIELD SURVEY
Field Survey refers to the visual inspection of
land for locating archaeological, paleontological, historic and architectural
sites. There are many different approaches to field survey, any one or more of
which may be appropriate in different situations. Consequently, it is not
possible to broadly prescribe which approach is most suitable for any specific
types of developments. In most cases, this can be reasonably determined only
after having gained familiarity with the particular environmental and cultural
setting through background research and preliminary field reconnaissance in
Stage 1.
The intensity of field survey in Stage 2
depends on two important factors: the projected impact of the proposed
action(s), and the quality of any existing historic site inventory in the
project area. For example, a project whose actions will be negligible and
diffuse may require less intensive survey than one in which direct, physical
impacts are clearly discernible. Similarly, an area which has received
substantial inventory survey may also require a less intensive approach than
an area which has undergone no previous survey.
Field survey will also likely differ, both in
its basic strategy and scope, depending on the particular kind of historic
sites being sought. For this reason, the following discussion on basic
approaches to field survey will frequently distinguish between historic
resources of an archaeological nature and those more commonly associated with
the built environment. The former category includes historic, prehistoric, and
paleontological sites whose proper investigation requires the use of
established archaeological techniques. The latter primarily includes buildings
or other structures of historical or architectural value. Whether one or other
category of historic sites can be expected to occur in any project area, will
have been reasonably ascertained from research undertaken in Stage 1. It is
not inconceivable, however, to expect examples of each site type in any one
area.
Field survey shall involve complete or sample
coverage of the project area, and employ accepted site survey techniques.
Subsurface testing must be used, where necessary, to assist in locating
historic sites and recording their precise dimensions.
2C.2 COMPLETE SURVEY
Ideally, the historic resources inventory
should be based on intensive survey of every portion of the impact area.
Maximum area coverage would naturally provide the most comprehensive
understanding of resource density and distribution. However, in many cases,
the size of the project area may render a complete inventory survey
impractical, particularly with respect to time and cost considerations.
2C.3 SAMPLE SURVEY
More often than not, it will be more practical
to survey intensively only a sample of the entire project area. The selection
of the sample area will be approached systematically and based on statistical
criteria, or judgmentally, relying primarily on subjective criteria. In
historic and architectural site surveys, survey areas are usually selected on
the basis of direct or indirect evidence from documentary and other sources.
2C.4 SYSTEMATIC SAMPLING
The preferred survey strategy is one based on
accepted statistical sampling practices and site survey techniques designed to
obtain a representative sample of historic resources in the project area. A
statistically valid sample will allow reliable predictions to be made
regarding total resource density, distribution, and variability.
In systematic sample surveys, it may
occasionally be necessary to exempt certain areas from intensive inspection
owing to such factors as excessive slope, minimal land surface, excessive land
altercation or modification by natural or artificial agents, land ownership,
or current land use. These areas must be explicitly defined. On the other
hand, unless the absence of sites can be unequivocally demonstrated, areas
characterized by an absence of road access or poor ground surface visibility
owing to dense vegetation should not normally be exempted.
The proponent is encouraged to seek specialist
consultation to ensure that the statistical sampling methods selected for
historic resource survey are both appropriate and accurately applied. Previous
studies of sample size, survey intensity, and statistical design and
application under similar environmental and development project conditions,
should also be consulted.
2C.5 JUDGEMENTAL SAMPLING
Under certain circumstances it may be
appropriate to select a portion or sample of the project area based entirely
on professional judgement regarding the location of sites. In judgemental
sample surveys, only those areas are selected which can reasonably be expected
to contain historic sites.
Judgemental sampling may be a suitable strategy
for archaeological and paleontological site surveys where the cultural and
biophysical factors which influenced the distribution of these sites over the
landscape are sufficiently known. Some factors which should be sufficiently
understood if judgemental sampling is to be an effective and productive
strategy include ethnographic and ethno-historic patterns of settlement, land
use, and resource exploitation, the kinds and distribution of aboriginal food
sources, and restrictions on site location imposed by physical terrain or
climatic regimes. Even so, a judgemental sample is usually less desirable than
one based on systematic sampling methods, in that the former has little, if
any, predictive capability. If this method is used, rationale such as the
above must be included in the report.
Judgemental sampling is commonly employed in
surveys of historical and architectural sites. Selection of the survey area is
often based on documentary evidence, reports made by knowledgeable persons, or
other sources which identify specific or approximate locations of potential
historic sites. In other cases, inventory survey is conducted in areas
suspected of having high potential for containing historic or architectural
sites although no such sites have necessarily been referenced in the
literature or otherwise reported. Site surveys of this sort are often
conducted on a district lot-by-lot basis, with particular emphasis placed on
those areas of earliest recorded development. It may also be appropriate to
survey only particular kinds of historic or architectural properties such as
domestic, "high-style", or industrial buildings, or vernacular architecture,
or only properties representing particular themes.
2C.6 BASIC COMPONENTS OF
SITE SURVEYING
Site surveying is the process by which historic
sites are actually located and identified on the ground. For most historic
site surveys, this activity will consist of two basic components: surface
survey and subsurface testing. For a more thorough account of these technical
field aspects of heritage resource impact assessment, the reader is advised to
consult appropriate procedure manuals.
2C.7 SURFACE SURVEY
Surface survey refers to the actual visual
inspection of the survey area. The precise approach may again differ somewhat
depending on the type of historic site being sought. Surveys designed to
locate sites of an archaeological nature normally involve a foot traverse
along pre-defmed linear transects spaced at systematic intervals across the
survey area. This systematic approach is designed to achieve representative
area coverage. Alternatively, an archaeological site survey may involve a
non-systematic or random walk across the survey area.
Surveys designed to locate sites of historic or
architectural value need not be restricted to foot traverse, but may often be
satisfactorily conducted using more rapid means of transportation. The survey
design itself may or may not be of systematic nature. In the strictest sense,
the term "surface survey" does not apply to survey of historically or
architecturally important buildings or other facilities. Instead, this aspect
of field survey usually involves scanning interior and/or exterior features of
the site.
In some cases, it may be appropriate to employ
a combination of systematic and judgemental sampling and surface survey
methods. Mixed strategies of this sort may involve systematic sampling and
judgemental or random surface survey, or alternatively, judgemental sample
selection and systematic surface coverage. In some situations, it may be
useful to utilize different survey strategies in different parts of the
project area. For example, intensive systematic survey may be appropriate in
areas of direct adverse impact, and judgemental survey in areas of minimal or
indirect impact.
2C.8 SUBSURFACE TESTING
Subsurface testing, relevant where sites of an
archaeological nature are concerned, is recognized as an integral part of site
surveying. It serves two basic functions:
- assists, where necessary, in locating
historic sites, and
- assists in ascertaining a site's horizontal
and vertical dimensions and other internal characteristics.
In the present context, subsurface testing
should not be confused with "evaluative testing" discussed below.
Subsurface testing is regarded as an extremely
useful field technique for locating sites, particularly in heavily vegetated
areas with minimal surface exposure. In such cases, it should be consistently
employed as a supplement to surface survey. Subsurface testing should be
especially intensive in areas suspected of having high historic site
potential, regardless of ground surface conditions.
Additionally, subsurface testing may be useful
on the site for adequately recording horizontal extent, as well as the depth
of cultural deposits or degree of internal stratification. Recognizing that
any form of excavation causes irreversible disturbance to a historic site,
subsurface testing should be used only when necessary, and in moderation. All
test units placed on a site must be accurately recorded and mapped.
Although commonly referred to as "shovel
testing", subsurface testing may also be accomplished using augers and
core-samplers provided conditions are suitable. Except where these latter
techniques are used, test units averaging 40 cm by 40 cm will be generally
appropriate. These will be placed systematically and/or randomly throughout
the survey area, depending on the surface survey strategy being employed.
Screening the debris from test units, particularly those placed on a site, is
recommended. The precise location, frequency, size, depth, and interval
spacing of the test units will depend on the nature of the survey design, as
well as various biophysical factors.
2C.9 SITE RECORDING
The intensive inventory phase of research in
Stage 2 also includes the full documentation or recording of each identified
site. All historic sites shall be recorded on standard site inventory forms.
The A.S.C. Site Inventory and the Canadian Inventory of Historic Building
forms shall be used for archaeological and historic-architectural sites,
respectively. Paleontological site inventory forms are currently in
preparation.
Site surveyors are advised to consult the
Canadian Inventory of Historic Building: Exterior Training Manual when
recording architectural sites. These manuals identify various kinds of
information which must be recorded and outline specific instructions or
procedures to follow in this regard.
In addition to various site characteristics
which must be recorded, photographs and a map or sketch of the site (drawn to
scale) are also required. For archaeological, and many historic sites, the map
must illustrate both the arrangement or plan of the site, as well as its
precise location relative to the nearest recognizable and permanent landmark.
Because these sites are often situated in remote areas, the sketch must be of
sufficient quality to ensure that the site can be readily relocated in the
field.
Once completed, site inventory forms must be
forwarded to Historic Resources Division in St. John's, Newfoundland in order
that each site may be assigned its appropriate "Borden" identification number,
or geocode. All archaeological sites in Canada are assigned a Borden code.
This identifies each specific archaeological site on the basis of its
geographical coordinates, defined as a four letter sequence, and its numerical
order of discovery (e.g. EeBl-2). The geocode is a unique 12 digit number
assigned by Parks Canada to every building or other structure of historic or
architectural importance.
Site recording also includes a thorough
description of all cultural material observed at a site. A representative
selection of diagnostic artifacts or features should be drawn to scale or
photographed in situ, or both. Drawings and photographs must be
submitted with the site inventory forms.
2D SITE EVALUATION
Site evaluation is the process of objectively
determining the value or significance of an identified historic resource. The
results of this evaluation are used as a principle basis for making resource
management decisions. For example, the decision as to which remedial action,
if any, should be taken in the event disturbance to a site is imminent, will
be largely based on the degree of significance placed on the site. Site
evaluation is, therefore, a vital aspect of detailed impact assessment.
Site evaluation is required wherever an
identified historic site will be adversely affected by a proposed development
action. Normally, this will include all historic sites located within the area
of project impact which are in unavoidable conflict with a land modifying
action.
There are many kinds of significance that need
to be taken into account when evaluating historic resources. These "types" of
significance, which serve as frames of reference for site evaluation, are
measured for each site using explicit criteria. Once the basic types of
significance and their related criteria are specified, the actual process of
evaluating significance is reasonably straightforward. Basically, the
evaluation is accomplished simply by measuring the characteristics of a site
against the prescribed set of criteria. The fit between the criteria and the
historic site is then evaluated. Be weighing the types of significance
considered and identified, and the specific criteria themselves, a final
judgment of site significance may be reached. Several comments pertaining to
the conduct of site evaluation require particular attention. Firstly, the
importance of employing professional historic resource specialists for site
evaluation must be recognized. Evaluation should be performed conscientiously
by persons knowledgeable or familiar with the type of resource being
evaluated. This will ensure that potentially relevant data for evaluating
historic sites are not omitted.
Secondly, the process of arriving at a final
judgement regarding a site's significance must be rigorously documented, and
all aspects of the methodological approach justified. In particular,
documentation shall include the nature of the ranking system used, for
example, qualitative grading or numerical scoring, and the actual weights
placed upon various criteria.
Finally, the proponent is encouraged to develop
innovative approaches to site evaluation which emphasize quantitative analysis
and objectivity. Such approaches would greatly facilitate impact assessment
review and decision-making processes.
2D.1 TYPES OF SIGNIFICANCE
A number of basic kinds of significance may be
used in evaluating historic resources within an impact assessment and
management context.
The following types, which will be generally
appropriate for all historic resources, should be given particular
consideration.
- scientific significance
- public significance
- integrity/condition
Scientific Significance: Historic
resources may be scientifically significant in two respects. A site's
potential to yield information which, if properly recovered, will
substantially further our understanding of Newfoundland-Labrador heritage, is
one appropriate measure of scientific significance. In this respect, historic
sites should be evaluated in terms of their capability or potential to help
resolve current heritage research problems.
Scientific significance should also refer to a
site's potential for making substantive contributions to other disciplines, or
for providing information which may be used by industry for practical
purposes. The relevance of historic resource data to private industry may also
be interpreted as a particular kind of public significance.
Public Significance: Public significance
refers to a site's relative potential for enhancing the public's understanding
and appreciation of the past. In this respect, a site's interpretive,
educational, and recreational potential are valid indications of a site's
public significance. Unlike those criteria for measuring scientific
significance, public significance criteria such as ease of access, land
ownership, or scenic setting, are often external to the site itself.
Integrity/Condition: Both the integrity
and condition of an historic site are important considerations for
significance evaluation. However, an assessment of integrity and condition
alone is not sufficient to establish significance. These factors are probably
best viewed as specific criteria for measuring certain types of significance
(e.g. public significance).
Integrity refers to a site's degree of
authenticity, and, in this respect, pertains chiefly to historic buildings or
architectural sites. These heritage properties may possess integrity of
design, workmanship, materials, and/or location or setting. Condition, on the
other hand, applies to all historic sites, and refers to the degree of
disturbance or dilapidation of a site.
Although usually more restricted to particular
types of heritage resources, the following areas of significance may also be
of use for site evaluation purposes.
- ethnic significance
- historical significance
- economic significance
Ethnic Significance: Ethnic significance
applies to historic sites which have religious, mythological, social, or other
special symbolic value to an ethnically distinct community or group of people.
Archaeological, historical, and architectural sites may have some degree of
ethnic significance. Determining the ethnic significance of an historic site
may require consulting those groups who occupy or have occupied the site, the
descendants of such groups, or people who presently own or live near the site.
Historical Significance: Historically
significant sites can be readily associated with individuals or events that
made an important, lasting contribution to the historic development of a
particular locality or larger area. Historically important sites are also
those which reflect or commemorate the historic socioeconomic character of an
area. This type of significance applies to both architectural and historic
sites, including those of an archaeological nature. Normally, sites having
high historical significance will also have high social or public
significance.
Economic Significance: The economic or
monetary value of an historic site, if calculable, is also an important
indication of significance. In some cases, it may be possible to project
monetary benefits derived from the public's use of an historic site as an
educational or recreational facility. This may be accomplished by employing
established benefit estimation methods, most of which have been developed for
evaluating outdoor recreation. The objective is to determine the willingness
of users, including local residents and tourists, to pay for the experiences
or services the site provides even though no payment is presently being made.
Calculation of user benefits will normally require some study of the visitor
population.
Factors to consider when evaluating historic
resource significance are provided for each site type in Appendices I - IV.
These checklists of criteria are not intended to be exhaustive or inflexible.
Rather the user should revise and add to them as necessary. It should also be
recognized that these and other significant criteria will likely change as
both public and professional values, interests, and priorities change.
2D.2 INFORMATION SOURCES
Information on which a determination of site
significance is based can be derived from evaluation testing, surface
collecting, as well as several other sources.
2D.3 EVALUATIVE TESTING
Evaluative testing, commonly referred to as
"test excavation", is appropriate at sites containing buried cultural or
paleonto logical materials. Evaluative testing implies "controlled" excavation
of a portion of such sites using established data recovery techniques. The
objective is ~to gain a sufficient impression of a site's content and context
so that a reliable assessment of significance can be made. Concurrently,
evaluative testing can provide proper cost information for formal excavation
or mitigation should this latter activity be necessary.
Evaluative testing shall involve:
- placement of one or more excavation units
(normally im by im, or 2m by 2m),
- excavation by systematic levels (e.g.
stratigraphic or arbitrary),
- mapping, measuring, and recording
horizontal and vertical provenances of all cultural items or other relevant
materials observed within the excavation unit, and
- recovery and cataloguing of all recorded
materials.
Profile drawings, or scaled maps of the
stratigraphy and features exposed in the walls of an excavation unit, should
also be prepared where appropriate. The subsequent analysis and interpretation
of the recovered materials and the context in which they were found will
provide an indication of site significance.
Evaluative testing should not be interpreted as
a full-scale data recovery or salvage operation. As it is not intended to
alleviate adverse impacts or resolve conflicts with a proposed development it
is far less intensive than full-scale data recovery. The appropriate number of
units to excavate for evaluation purposes will vary as a function of the
site's particular characteristics, especially it's horizontal and vertical
dimensions and depositional complexity. In some cases, a single excavation
unit will be appropriate for significance evaluation, while in other cases,
several units, systematically or judgmentally placed across the site area,
will be required. Natural and artificial exposures should also be used where
possible to supplement or even to replace actual excavation units.
2D.4 SURFACE COLLECTING
Surface collecting may be employed as a means
of obtaining site evaluation information wherever archaeological, historical,
or paleontological remains are evident on the ground surface. However, where
these sites contain buried deposits, some degree of evaluating testing will
also be required.
Surface collecting shall involve:
- placement of an appropriate grid network
(normally 2m x 2m units) over the site area, or portion thereof,
- mapping, measuring, and recording of all
cultural items and other relevant materials observed within the grid system,
and
- collection and cataloguing of recorded
material (often from systematically selected grid units).
Systematic surface collections from
archaeological sites should be limited, as far as possible, to a
representative sample of materials necessary to aid in site evaluation.
Surface collecting from paleontological sites should normally be restricted to
a representative sample of diagnostic specimens. Unless a site is
exceptionally small and limited to surface distribution, no attempt should be
made at this stage of assessment to collect all or a major portion of the
surface materials. Intensive surface collecting should be reserved for
full-scale data recovery operations if required in Stage 3.
2E IMPACT IDENTIFICATION
AND ASSESSMENT
This integral and final phase of Stage 2
assessment is necessarily concerned with identifying development related
impacts on historic resources and assessing their effect upon future uses of
the resource. The identification and assessment of historic resource impacts
follows directly from intensive inventory and significance evaluation.
In order to properly assess the effect of a
development action on an historic site, it is necessary to compare the
anticipated state of the resource following project implementation against
some initial reference state. Anticipated impacts upon historic sites and the
rate of resource depletion in the absence of the proposed development should
be taken into account when defining the initial reference state.
The impact assessment phase of research should
commence with a thorough discussion of the kinds of impacts imposed by the
development and proceed with a comprehensive evaluation of their level of
effect. Impacts must be identified, assessed and reported for each phase of
the undertaking in which they are expected to occur, such as preconstruction,
construction, operation and maintenance.
2E.1 DESCRIBING THE IMPACT
An historic resource impact may be broadly
defined as the net change between the condition or integrity of an historic
site "with" and "without" the proposed development project. This change in
condition or integrity may be either beneficial or adverse.
Beneficial Impacts: Beneficial impacts
occur whenever a proposed development action actively protects, preserves, or
enhances an historic resource. For example, a development action may have a
beneficial impact by removing or lessening natural erosion of a site.
Similarly, an action may serve to preserve a site for future use, by covering
it with a protective layer of sand or fill. In other cases, the public or
economic significance of a heritage site may be enhanced by a development
action which facilitates or encourages its non-destructive public use.
Beneficial effects upon resources are unlikely to occur frequently, but should
nevertheless be thoroughly documented and discussed.
Adverse Impacts: More commonly, the
effects of a development project on heritage sites will be of an adverse
nature. Adverse impacts occur under conditions that include:
- destruction or alteration of all or part of
an historic site,
- isolation from its natural setting, and
- introduction of physical, chemical, visual,
audible, or atmospheric elements that are out of character with the historic
resource and its setting.
Adverse impacts can be more specifically
defined as either direct, indirect or potential impacts.
Direct Impact: Direct impacts are the
immediately demonstrable effects of a project which can be directly attributed
to particular land modifying actions. They are directly caused by the
development project or its ancillary facilities, and occur at the same time
and place. Examples include all project-related land disturbances associated
with coal or metal mining, dam construction, linear developments such as
pipelines, transmission lines, railway, and roads, and intensive land uses
including agricultural, recreational, industrial, residential, or forestry
use. The immediate consequences of these sorts of major developments, such as
slope failure following reservoir inundation, should also be regarded as
direct impacts.
Indirect Impact: Indirect or secondary
adverse impacts result from activities other than actual development actions.
Nevertheless, they are clearly brought about by the development project, and
would not occur without it. Indirect impacts will normally occur at the same
time as the development, but not necessarily in the same immediate area. For
example, the accelerated erosion of an historic site resulting from
alterations in normal flow patterns downstream from the development site would
constitute an indirect impact. Increased vandalism of historic sites,
resulting from improved or newly introduced access, would also be considered
an indirect impact.
Potential Impact: Potential impacts may
occur either as a direct or indirect result of a development project. However,
unlike direct or indirect impacts, potential impacts are removed in time and
possibly in distance from the project. In other words, although potential
impacts occur as a result of a project, and are predictable, they are not
immediately evident.
Potential impacts normally occur in relation to
other factors, particularly socioeconomic changes in an area. Changes in land
use patterns or population density, such as increased urban or industrial
development, intensification of farming, or increased recreational use, are
sources of potential adverse impact on historic sites.
2E.2 ASSESSING LEVEL OF
EFFECT
Besides merely identifying project-related
impacts, it will be necessary to ascertain their individual level of effect on
historic resources. Previous evaluations of site significance are of
fundamental importance and concern in this analysis. The level of effect
analysis or impact assessment, is intended to determine the extent or degree
of which future opportunities for scientific research, preservation, or public
appreciation are foreclosed or otherwise adversely affected by a proposed
action. In doing so, the assessment can provide a reasonable indication of an
impact's relative significance or importance. Impact assessment should include
careful consideration of the following level-of-effect indicators:
- magnitude
- severity
- duration
- range
- frequency
- diversity
- cumulative effect
- rate of change
Impact magnitude refers to the size or force of
impact which can be expected to occur. The resultant loss of historic resource
value may be measured (in amount or degree) in relation to actual physical
alteration or destruction of the site.
The severity of an impact refers to its degree
of irreversibility. Unavoidable adverse impacts which present a totally
irreversible and irretrievable commitment of heritage property are of the
highest severity.
Duration of impact refers to the length of time
an adverse impact persists. Impacts may be of a short-term or temporary
nature. Conversely, particular actions may impose more persistent or long-term
effects on historic sites.
Range refers to the spatial distribution of an
impact, for example, whether widespread or site-specific.
Frequency of impact refers to the number of
times an impact is expected to occur. For example, an adverse impact of
variable magnitude, severity, and duration may occur only once. On the other
hand, an impact such as cultivation or project maintenance may be of a
recurring or ongoing nature.
Diversity of impact reflects the number of
different kinds of development or development-related actions expected to
impact historic site.
Cumulative effects imply a progressive
alteration or destruction of site owning to the repetitive
or recurring nature of one or more impacts. Cumulative effects should also be
addressed when
discussing rate of change.
The rate of change in integrity or condition of
an historic resource will usually be difficult to predict at this stage of
project planning. This parameter is normally accounted for in the context of
impact monitoring during and following project implementation. Nevertheless,
the anticipated rate of change should be determined at this time if possible
as it will provide an important and useful indication of level of effect.
Level of effect analysis must be conducted and
reported in a quantitative and objective fashion. As with site evaluation, all
aspects of the methodological approach used, particularly the system of
ranking and scoring level-of-effect indicators, must be rigorously documented
and justified. Areas of uncertainty in impact assessment must also be
identified, and means of dealing with or managing this uncertainty should be
recommended.
2F REPORT CONTENT AND
RECOMMENDED FORMAT
Although the precise nature of detailed impact
assessment will occasionally vary, both in emphasis and scope, the following
reporting guidelines will generally be appropriate. These guidelines are
intended to specify the kinds of information which should be included in an historic resource impact assessment report. The development proponent is
encouraged to make every effort to address the recommended topics, and, where
possible, to present this information in the format illustrated below.
Compliance with these reporting guidelines will greatly facilitate the review
process and ensure that administrative decisions necessary to manage
Newfoundland and Labrador historic resources are made in the best interests of
all parties concerned. Historic resource impact assessment reports received by
the Historic Resources Division for review should contain, but need not be
limited to, the following sections.:
(1) Letter of Transmittal
(2) Title Page
(3) Credit Sheet
(4) Management Summary
(5) Table of Contents
(6) List of Figures, Plates, Tables, Appendices
(7) Introductory Statement
(8) Proposed Development Project
(9) Project Area
(10) Materials and Methods
(11) Resource Inventory
(12) Resource Evaluation
(13) Impact Identification and Assessment
(14) Evaluation of Research
(15) Impact Management Recommendations
(16) Reference Cited
(17) Appendices
2F 1. Letter of
Transmittal
2F 2. Title Page
The title page should include:
(a) the official development project name and
location,
(b) the type of historic resource assessment report,
(c) the number of the permit under which the research activities were
authorized,
(d) the name and address of the agency for which the report was prepared,
(e) the date of the report, and
(f) the author's signature and title.
2F 3. Credit Sheet
The credit sheet should indicate the names,
addresses, and professional affiliations of the principle contributors to the
detailed impact assessment study including:
(a) the director or supervisor,
(b) researcher(s), and
(c) report author(s).
2F 4. Management Summary
The management summary consists of a brief
overview of the study. Important findings and the report's major
recommendations should be emphasized including:
(a) the number and types of historic
resources identified within the area of project impact,
(b) the significance of threatened resources,
(c) the types of impacts on historic sites, and their level of effect or
significance, and
(d) recommendations for managing unavoidable adverse impacts.
2F 5. Table of Contents
The table of contents must be arranged in
accordance with the sequence of topical
headings and their corresponding page numbers.
2F 6. List of Figures,
Plates, Tables, Appendices.
All figures, plates, tables, and appendices
must be referenced to title and page
number, and listed according to the order in which they appear in the text of
the
report.
2F 7. Introductory
Statement
Minimally, the introductions should include:
(a) the name of the proponent, and the
general nature of the proposed development project,
(b) the purpose, objectives, and scope of the detailed impact assessment,
(c) the person(s) conducting the assessment and the kinds of professional
expertise involved,
(d) the dates, duration and scope of research activities including
problem-oriented
research, where applicable, and
(e) the organizational format of the report.
2F 8. Proposed Development
Project
This section should provide a brief summary of
pertinent project planning and
engineering aspects of the development. Engineering plans, photos, and any
other
illustrative materials, should be used to discuss:
(a) project design planning and historic
resource assessment to date,
(b) any changes in the original project design or in the level of
development,
(c) precise boundaries of the project area, including locations of all
ancillary activities and facilities,
(d) the projected extent and level of land alteration or disturbance, and
(e) project scheduling
2F 9. Project Area
This section shall provide a brief description
of the project area. Emphasis should be placed on relating the natural and
cultural environments. The area of project impact may have been sufficiently
described in the previous overview assessment report, in which case, a brief
summary of and proper reference of the document will suffice. Description of
the project area should include:
(a) biophysical features such as physiography,
drainage, fauna and flora,
(b) a discussion of past and present ecological conditions that bear upon
human settlement and land use,
(c) past and present land use practices,
(d) the condition of the land, particularly the extent of alteration from
agricultural activity, forest harvesting, or other intensive land uses, and
(e) weather conditions and patterns, particularly as they relate to or
affect the conduct or scheduling of historic resource assessment in the
field.
2F 10. Materials and
Methods
The methodology section shall outline the basic
research design or plan of study, and document the precise methods and
equipment used to implement the plan. The methodology underlying each
principle research activity in detailed impact assessment should be presented
separately. The discussion should include:
Intensive Inventory
(a) the role of historic resource overview
assessment (Stage 1) in designing the intensive inventory strategy,
(b) whether complete or sample coverage of
the project area was undertaken,
(c) a thorough account of any sampling
design, particularly sample selection and size,
(d) where applicable, the rationale
underlying stratification of the project area according to resource
potential, and the level of survey intensity in these strata,
(e) the level of confidence which may be
placed on the results of any sample survey,
(j) the number of surveyors employed, the
manner in which they were distributed over the survey area, including
distance intervals and direction of travel, and the amount of time spent
site surveying in any one area,
(g) the types and precise location of areas
exempted from intensive inspection,
(h) methods used to cope with special
difficulties such as poor access, or poor ground surface visibility,
(i) conditions under which subsurface testing
was done, and the particular techniques or practices employed including
frequency, interval spacing and unit dimensions,
(j) historical and architectural site survey
techniques including the method of transportation, complete or sample
coverage, intensity of inspection (i.e. facades, exteriors, and/or
interiors), and, if applicable, specific kinds of properties sought,
(k) site recording practices, and
(l) sources consulted in designing the site
inventory strategy.
Site Evaluation
(a) the methods used to obtain information
for site evaluation purposes such as evaluative testing, surface collecting,
literature research, and/or consultation with knowledgeable persons,
(b) the nature of the evaluative testing
program undertaken including test frequency, unit dimensions, mapping,
recording, and data recovery techniques, and other relevant procedures or
practices,
(c) techniques of surface collecting
including the sampling design, and mapping,
recording, and collection practices,
(d) the process or system used to evaluate
relative site significance including specific weights, ranks, or grades
assigned to significance types and criteria,
(e) the rationale underlying the evaluation
process, and
(f) the kinds of professional expertise
involved.
Impact Identification and Assessment
(a) the manner in which impacts resulting
from proposed development actions were identified or described (refer to
Section of these guidelines),
(b) the process used to assess the level of
effect upon heritage resources (i.e. the method of evaluating impacts),
(c) impact assessment criteria and their
relative weighting and,
(d) the rationale underlying the predictive
impact assessment model.
2F 11. Resource Inventory
This section shall present results of the
intensive inventory phase of detalled impact assessment. Discussion of the
resource inventory should include:
(a) maps showing areas of project impact
intensively surveyed, areas surveyed at
lower levels of intensity, and areas not examined,
(b) maps showing all recorded historic sites
in relation to the proposed development project,
(c) the number of historic sites recorded,
also shown as a percentage of the total anticipated in the project area,
(d) a brief narrative description of each
site including present condition and use, distinguishing features, and its
general relationship to the regional environmental and cultural setting
(tabularize as necessary),
(e) a qualitative and quantitative summary of
all cultural material or features
observed or collected,
(f) to the extent possible, an interpretation
of the historic resource inventory including observed spatial patterning of
sites in the project area, temporal, functional, and contextual
characteristics, and comparisons with local and regional resources,
(g) an explanation of negative results, for
example, where and why were historic sites absent in areas suspected of
having moderate to high resource potential, and
(h) where appropriate, any further
predictions concerning potential resource variability, density,
distribution, and importance in the project area.
2F 12. Resource
Evaluation
This section shall provide the relative
significance of each evaluated site, based on the methodological approach
described in Section 10 of the report. Site-specific assessments should be
tabularized as necessary. The discussion should include:
(a) the types of significance considered and
identified, and the specific criteria used to measure each type (refer to
Appendices I-IV of these guidelines),
(b) the degree to which the significance
criteria apply to the resource being evaluated,
(c) maps showing the location of sites of
high, medium, and low significance in relation to the proposed development,
and
(d) in so far as can be determined, the
overall heritage resource importance of the study area.
2F 13. Impact
Identification and Assessment
This section shall consist of a comprehensive
statement of impacts, and a thorough assessment of their level of effect. Much
of this information can be effectively presented in an impact matrix relating
development actions responsible for the impacts to recorded historic
resources. The discussion of beneficial and adverse impacts should also
include:
(a) a map of the project area delineating
areas of direct, indirect, and potential impact and precise locations of all
recorded historic resources,
(b) a schedule relating the timmg of impacts
to phases of development,
(c) anticipated impacts and the rate of
resource depletion expected in the absence of the proposed development (i.e.
without the project),
(d) the probability of impacts occurring
(i.e. with the project) and the specific time and phase of development in
which they are expected to occur,
(e) impacts which have occurred to date from
exploration, engineering, and other prefeasibility studies,
(f) the relative significance of anticipated
impacts or their predicted level of effect in relation to heritage values
which would depreciate or be lost should the impact occur, and
(g) areas of uncertainty regarding the
assessment of impacts.
2F 14. Evaluation of
Research
In this section, the report author will
evaluate the results of detailed impact assessment research completed to date.
The discussion should address:
(a) the adequacy or accuracy of predictive
statements made in Stage 1 concerning the potential density, description,
variety, and significance of history resources in the project area,
(b) the suitability of the inventory strategy
and site survey techniques employed,
(c) the suitability and reliability of the
site evaluation and impact assessment methods employed,
(d) the reliability of the resultant data,
and any deficiencies in these results, and
(e) the relationship between the results and
the stated objectives of the assessment study, including problem-oriented
research objectives, if applicable.
2F 15. Impact Management
Recommendations
Based on 11, 12, 13 and 14 above, this section
shall outline the development proponent's recommendations for managing
unavoidable adverse impacts on all identified historic sites. Options for
managing impacts will refer to various mitigation and/or compensation
opportunities, as defined in Section 3 of these impact assessment guidelines.
Mitigation and/or compensation recommendations need not be overly specific at
this time. They should however, be presented in sufficient detail to allow the
Historic Resources Division to adequately comment on their appropriateness in
each case. Once approval-in-principal is given, the proponent will submit a
separate, detailed impact management proposal outlining specific objectives,
techniques, time and cost schedules, and other information. This research
proposal is essential for obtaining "Ministerialt1 authorization to implement
the recommended actions in Stage 3. The discussion of impact management
recommendations should include:
(a) a reference to those historic sites which
could be avoided by certain development plan modifications,
(b) opportunities available at each site for
mitigating unavoidable adverse impacts (tabularize as necessary),
(c) opportunities for compensation,
(d) the development proponent's preferred
impact management plan including what mitigative measures should be
undertaken for each impacted site,
- the amount and form of compensation which
should be paid,
- where the compensation funds should be directed,
- how and over what period of time the compensation should be allocated,
and
- under whose auspices, or direction the mitigation/compensation plan
shouldbe implemented.
(e) justification where no impact management
actions are recommended, and
(f) where appropriate, preliminary
recommendations or a tentative program and schedule for conducting
"surveillance" or "impact monitoring", or both, during project
implementation and operation in Stage 4. Refer to Section 4 of these
guidelines for a discussion of these management activities.
2F 16. References Cited
This section shall provide a comprehensive list
of all literary sources cited in the historic impact assessment report such as
publications, documents, and records. The reference list shall also include
the names of persons consulted and cited in the report, as well as the date on
which each communication was made.
2F 17. Appendices
A variety of informational items may be
appended to the impact assessment report. Minimally, this section should
include:
(a) appropriate tables, charts, graphs, maps,
photos, and other supportive materials which will facilitate the report's
review,
(b) a copy of the consultant's terms of
reference for Stage 2 studies, and
(c) a list of all recorded historic sites
referenced by their appropriate Borden classification number and arranged
according to either "adverse impact" or "no adverse impact".
A detailed proposal for implementing mitigation
or compensation studies may also be appended to the impact assessment report.
However, it should be recognized that revisions may be required in the
proposal before formal authorization to proceed is given.
|
