Ambiguity in CRZ order leaves coastline under threat of development
RELATED
The
Union government has exposed the country's shores to rampant
development by leaving ambiguous the definitions of the coastline's
features. The fallout of this uncertainty has been confusion among
states and renewed construction bids near shores.
The Centre's 2011 Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, which defines the scope of coastal conservation, stipulates different treatment for the country's bays and seafront. At seafronts, it prohibits construction at least up to 500 metres from the high tide line. At bays, it extends protection landward up to 100 metres or for the bay's width-whichever is less.
All importantly, the 2011 notification does not define the lesser-protected bays.
In a letter to the Union ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) earlier this year, the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA) sought the definition of what constitutes a bay. The issue is critical, say experts, since geomorphologically large parts of the coast of Maharashtra, Goa and north Karnataka are bays. The country's eastern coast, of course, sits by a bay-the Bay of Bengal. The 2011 notification reduces the effective protection on all these areas to a mere 100 metres, said officials.
The Maharashtra coastal authority believes the notification leaves the state particularly badly placed since "most of the state's coastal area is either on bays or creeks". Valsa Nair-Singh, secretary (environment), said the central environment ministry has so far not clarified the issue of bays in response to the state's letter.
Officials said the 1991 CRZ notification stipulated 500m CRZ area both for bays and seafront. Going by this specification, Maharashtra's Coastal Zone Management Plan was approved by the central environment ministry in 2000. But the 2011 notification disrupted the arrangement.
The urgency to define a bay occurred after the Bombay high court directed MCZMA to take a decision on the M N Koli CHS slum rehabilitation project at Mahim Bay. The scheme was submitted in 1984-85 and approved in 1990 as per the Development Control Regulations of 1967. Construction started immediately thereafter. But once the 1991 CRZ notification came into force, the proposal got stalled, first because the land got tagged CRZ-I and then CRZ-II.
As per the 2000 coastal zone management plan, in front of the slum plot is Mahim Bay and on one side the creek. The distance of the slum plot from the bay as well as the creek is more than 200 metres, said government officials, citing Google Maps and the coastal zone plan.
After the 2011 CRZ notification was issued, the slum plot's developer filed a petition claiming the water body at Mahim is a bay and not the sea. He asked that a 100m CRZ line be demarcated as per the new notification. Further, he argued that since the plot falls beyond the 100m line, it is out of the CRZ purview.
Officials said a bay is indistinguishable from seafront in most areas. "The distinction was not of much relevance earlier since the CRZ distance for seafront as well as recesses, such as bay, estuaries, creeks, was 500 metres," said an official.
G D Chiplunkar, an expert on CRZ, said it is imperative for the central environment ministry to clearly define seafront and bay. The difference in protections for the two, he said, is based on the difference in threats to them from tidal and wave energy.
"CRZ of 500 metres should be prescribed for open sea, where waves and tide can inundate larger areas; this is why more buffer is required. At creeks and inland waters, the wave effects are less since these areas are not exposed directly to the sea; thus 100m buffers are sufficient," he explained.
However, at Mahim Chowpatty, as also for the Bay of Bengal, the 500m buffer zone should apply since they face the sea, said Chiplunkar.
The Centre's 2011 Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, which defines the scope of coastal conservation, stipulates different treatment for the country's bays and seafront. At seafronts, it prohibits construction at least up to 500 metres from the high tide line. At bays, it extends protection landward up to 100 metres or for the bay's width-whichever is less.
All importantly, the 2011 notification does not define the lesser-protected bays.
In a letter to the Union ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) earlier this year, the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA) sought the definition of what constitutes a bay. The issue is critical, say experts, since geomorphologically large parts of the coast of Maharashtra, Goa and north Karnataka are bays. The country's eastern coast, of course, sits by a bay-the Bay of Bengal. The 2011 notification reduces the effective protection on all these areas to a mere 100 metres, said officials.
The Maharashtra coastal authority believes the notification leaves the state particularly badly placed since "most of the state's coastal area is either on bays or creeks". Valsa Nair-Singh, secretary (environment), said the central environment ministry has so far not clarified the issue of bays in response to the state's letter.
Officials said the 1991 CRZ notification stipulated 500m CRZ area both for bays and seafront. Going by this specification, Maharashtra's Coastal Zone Management Plan was approved by the central environment ministry in 2000. But the 2011 notification disrupted the arrangement.
The urgency to define a bay occurred after the Bombay high court directed MCZMA to take a decision on the M N Koli CHS slum rehabilitation project at Mahim Bay. The scheme was submitted in 1984-85 and approved in 1990 as per the Development Control Regulations of 1967. Construction started immediately thereafter. But once the 1991 CRZ notification came into force, the proposal got stalled, first because the land got tagged CRZ-I and then CRZ-II.
As per the 2000 coastal zone management plan, in front of the slum plot is Mahim Bay and on one side the creek. The distance of the slum plot from the bay as well as the creek is more than 200 metres, said government officials, citing Google Maps and the coastal zone plan.
After the 2011 CRZ notification was issued, the slum plot's developer filed a petition claiming the water body at Mahim is a bay and not the sea. He asked that a 100m CRZ line be demarcated as per the new notification. Further, he argued that since the plot falls beyond the 100m line, it is out of the CRZ purview.
Officials said a bay is indistinguishable from seafront in most areas. "The distinction was not of much relevance earlier since the CRZ distance for seafront as well as recesses, such as bay, estuaries, creeks, was 500 metres," said an official.
G D Chiplunkar, an expert on CRZ, said it is imperative for the central environment ministry to clearly define seafront and bay. The difference in protections for the two, he said, is based on the difference in threats to them from tidal and wave energy.
"CRZ of 500 metres should be prescribed for open sea, where waves and tide can inundate larger areas; this is why more buffer is required. At creeks and inland waters, the wave effects are less since these areas are not exposed directly to the sea; thus 100m buffers are sufficient," he explained.
However, at Mahim Chowpatty, as also for the Bay of Bengal, the 500m buffer zone should apply since they face the sea, said Chiplunkar.
No comments:
Post a Comment