2A INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES1 Field Survey2D SITE EVALUATION
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 Recording1 Types of Significance2E IMPACT IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT
2 Information Sources
3 Evaluation Testing
4 Surface Collecting
5 Other Sources1 Describing Impacts2F REPORT CONTENT AND RECOMMENDED FORMAT
2 Assessing Level of Effect
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),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.(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.
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.
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.
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, and2C.1 FIELD SURVEY- the complete, on-site recording or documentation of each identified site.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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, andIn the present context, subsurface testing should not be confused with "evaluative testing" discussed below.- assists in ascertaining a site's horizontal and vertical dimensions and other internal characteristics.
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.
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.
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.
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 significanceScientific 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.
- public significance
- integrity/conditionScientific 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 significanceEthnic 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
- economic significanceHistorical 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.
Information on which a determination of site significance is based can be derived from evaluation testing, surface collecting, as well as several other sources.
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: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.- 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.
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.
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: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.- 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).
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.
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,Adverse impacts can be more specifically defined as either direct, indirect or potential impacts.- 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.
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:
- magnitudeImpact 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.
- severity
- duration
- range
- frequency
- diversity
- cumulative effect
- rate of changeThe 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) AppendicesThe title page should include:
(a) the official development project name and location,2F 3. Credit Sheet
(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.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,2F 4. Management Summary
(b) researcher(s), and
(c) report author(s).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,2F 5. Table of Contents
(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.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.Minimally, the introductions should include:
(a) the name of the proponent, and the general nature of the proposed development project,2F 8. 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.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,2F 9. Project Area
(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 schedulingThis 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,2F 10. Materials and Methods
(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.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 Inventory2F 11. Resource 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.
This section shall present results of the intensive inventory phase of detalled impact assessment. Discussion of the resource inventory should include:
2F 12. Resource Evaluation(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.
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),2F 13. Impact Identification and Assessment(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.
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,2F 14. Evaluation of Research(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.
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,2F 15. Impact Management Recommendations(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.
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,2F 16. References Cited(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,(e) justification where no impact management actions are recommended, and
- 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.(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.
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.
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,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.(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".