Academic Articles -- ޢިލްމީ ލިޔުންތަކުގެ ޖަމާ
Browse
103 results
Search Results
Item Environmental Impact assessment : for the proposed development of heavy load site in Thilafushi(2010-09) Zahid, AhmedThis report addresses the environmental concerns of the proposed reclamation of an area of about 25,300m2 (2.53hectares) to a height of about 1.3m above MSL by dredging a harbour inside the area that is reclaimed. The total volume of sand required for the reclamation is estimated to be about 56,000 cubic metres. In order to get this volume of sand using the proposed borrow area (harbour), it is estimated that the borrow area has to be dredged to about 5m. Otherwise, an additional volume of about 18,000m3 of sand would be required to reclaim the given area. The primary objective of the project is to create a harbour for the several barges, landing crafts and other vessels owned and operated by Heavy Load, to provide safe and adequate access to the facility and to provide space for the different activities carried out on the site as well as to improve the services provided by the facility. The proposed project area is on the southeast corner of Thilafushi, which is the official landfill island for the entire Maldives. Currently, the site has two sand beds on the west and eastern sides, which mark the eastern and western edges of the proposed reclamation area. The exact area is being currently finalised by Thilafushi Corporation Limited (TCL). Once TCL finalises the exact dimensions of Heavy Load Site, dredging and reclamation works will begin. The entire external periphery of the dredge area would be sheet piled prior to dredging and filling works so as to minimize sedimentation. The southern periphery, which faces the sea, would have further protection using rock boulders, which would be installed as a final step. The project is, therefore, expected to take about eight to twelve months. A large proportion of the reef flat on the southeast end of Thilafushi has been dredged to provide access to the different industrial plots of land in the area by large vessels with an entrance channel at the southeast corner of Thilafushi reef. The proposed dredging is similar in size, however, would have less impact on the marine environment in the area. The reef flat in this area is almost completely dead with a few live porites. The reef slope is also mainly dead. Given the currents in the proposed dredge area is slow and generally in a westerly direction, the potential for the sediments to move to the reef flat would be small. However, it should be noted that there is a lack of long term data to support this observation. Therefore, sediment settlement on the reef has to be minimized and the most practicable means to achieve this would be to sheet pile the reclamation area prior to dredging. This would minimize sedimentation while further mitigation measures including silt curtains at the discharge points of the silt passages may be used. However, this would only be necessary if the silt levels reach very high levels.Item Environmental impact assessment : for the removal of seagrass beach replenishment activities in Herathera Island Resort, Addu atoll, Maldives(2010-09) CDE ConsultingThe Herathera Island has been experiencing seaweed overgrowth for a number of years, even before construction began on the island. Similarly, the island does not have a natural beach system which is suitable for a resort product. An attempt was made in 2007 and 2008 to remedy these shortcomings by removing seagrass and undertaking beach replenishment. Unfortunately, the beach replenishment design and implementation was flawed and new seagrass colonies have started to emerge. The island is currently is a worse condition, particularly its beach system. These environmental issues are decreasing the economic value of the tourism product being offered Resort and is reaching a point where the product may be unviable. Immediate action is required to address these issues, thus, a new and improved beach replenishment and seagrass removal programme. The proposed project involves the removal of sea grass colonies and beach replenishment. Details of the proposed project components are outlined below. a) Sea grass removal The primary component of the project is seagrass removal. Seagrass areas covering approximately 200,000 – 250,000 m2 is proposed to be cleared (see Site plan in Appendix B), 100,000 m3 of dredge waste. TwoEIA for the proposed Seagrass Removal and Beach Replenishment Activities in Herathera Island Resort Prepared by: CDE Consultancy Page| ix methods have been proposed for the project: 1) using a sand pump; 2) using an excavator and; 3) soft measures. b) Beach Replenishment Beach replenishment has been considered as part of the project to mitigate the severe erosion on the island. The dredged waste from the sea grass removal activity, after cleaning and sorting, will be used to replenish the a 2900 m beach up to 10 m from the existing shore line. Additional sand will be dredged from borrow areas within the lagoon using sand pumps and excavators. Replenishment will be carried out using a three staged process. The first stage will collect and filter sediments on designated sites. The second stage will transfer the cleaned sediments to severe erosion zones using trucks. The final stage will profile the beach using fine sand. For the direct replenishment, sand will be pumped or transferred via barges to a designated location, where loaders and trucks and move the material.Item Environmental impact assessment : for the development of a 14 Storey Building at H. Filigasdhoshuge, Malé, Maldives(2010-06) Jameel, AhmedMr. Ali Shareef is proposing to build a 14 storey hotel at H. Filigasdhoshuge. This Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report has been prepared in order to meet the requirements of Clause 5 of the Environmental Protection and Preservation Act of the Maldives to assess the impacts of proposed development at H. Filigasdhoshuge, Male’. The report has looked at the justifications for undertaking the proposed project components. Alternatives to proposed components or activities in terms of location, design and environmental considerations were suggested. A mitigation plan and monitoring programme before, during and after the works has also been proposed. The project component that has the greatest potential for environmental impact is the foundation component. The foundation type has been considered taking into consideration the noise and vibration impact from the deep pile foundation construction of project which was undertaken in the vicinity to the proposed site at Holiday Inn. The proposed project has proposed a raft foundation where piling technology has been chosen as a mechanism for shoring for the foundation construction process. A geotechnical investigation of the proposed project site was undertaken by the ELS – Amin International Pvt Ltd of Maldives in September 2008. The geotechnical investigation included the borehole investigation and Standard Penetration Tests. The geotechnical investigation revealed that the estimated settlement under the foundation would be less than 50mm which is acceptable for the type of foundation chosen for the building. Since the settlement under the foundation is small and a setback of 1 m has been provided between the plot boundary and the foundation, the ground settlement beyond the limits of the boundary would be too small to induce any significant damage to the neighbouring structures. A survey of the existing structural damage was carried out for all buildings that were located within a radius of 20m from the proposed building. The proposed project is expected to increase the housing units and commercial floor area available in Malé. It is inevitable that there would be some negative environmental impacts, especially when excavation is undertaken. Nevertheless, these negative impacts are not so severe to the extent that the project should not be allowed to take place. As a result, a comprehensive monitoring component has been suggested which takes in to consideration the most important elements that require regular checks. This monitoring component will be adhered and will allow the assessment of long term changes, despite the limited nature of the impact. The most important consideration is the socioeconomic impacts that have been assessed mainly as positive in nature. Not only are they positive, but most importantly would they remain positive for a long term. Therefore, it appears justified from a technical and from an environmental point of view, to carry out the proposed project in light of the existing socio‐economic developments.Item Initial environmental examination for a coral frame project(2010-07) Systems Engineering and Marine ConsultingThe potential environmental impacts of the development of a coral propagation project on the island of H.A. Manafaru are assessed. Manafaru is leased to Beach House Maldives and is operated by the Waldorf Astoria collection of the Hilton group. The assessment exposes the solutions and preferred alternatives as well as mitigation measures to minimize any negative impacts whilst trying to derive the maximum positive impacts from the project. Manafaru has very little coral cover after being degraded by the 1998 bleaching event. As it is important to be proactive in reef restoration, the resort management wishes to enhance the value of the island by propagating corals using the coral frame technique. The frames will be installed near the water villas and sparsely on the house reef. Coral fragments will be attached by a marine biologist and will develop into full colonies within a few years. Coral fragments from the house reef will provide a small number of fragments and will heal rapidly. Preference will be given to damaged colonies. 136 frames of 1m2 will be initially deployed, and after the first batch, the existing frames will provide fragments for transplantation. The project will start as soon as approval is granted, and as this is a long term project, it could span several years before completion. The island of Manafaru is located inside the northernmost atoll of the Maldives, and is subject to high winds and warming waters, which may be a cause of low coral survival. As the island is located in the middle of the atoll, the waves reaching its shores are diffraction of swells, and wind waves. As the energy encountered are of second magnitude, and the reef does not form a proper crest, the waves reach the island with less obstruction than most areas. Sand displacement depends on the predominant influence during different monsoons, forming a bulging beach rather than a sand tip.Item First addendum to the environmental impact assessment for the proposed harbour project in Nilandhoo, Faafu Atoll, Maldives(2016-07) SandcaysThis is the first Addendum to the EIA for the harbour project being undertaken in Nilandhoo, Faafu Atoll. The project is proposed by Ministry of Housing and Infrastructure. The project constitutes dredging of a large harbour for the people of Nilandhoo while at the same time creating land using dredged sand including additional dredging for proposed reclamation of 10hectares of land for housing and infrastructure development including semiindustrial activities. An environmental assessment was undertaken for this project in Nov 2015, which has been subsequently approved. According to the EIA report, the objective of the harbour project is to provide a sizeable harbour to accommodate the increasing number of vessels in the island and to restore the usability of the harbour that has been filled over time with the breakwater being damaged, especially following the tsunami of 2004. The harbour on the northeast side is too small given that Nilandhoo has a lot of large fishing vessels and has been serving as the regional hub with fuelling services established on the old (tsunamidamaged) harbour on the northwest. This addendum addresses the modification to the location of the borrow area. One of the main concerns is that the performance of the dredger is affected due to having to pump up to 1km from the borrow to the fill area. Therefore, it has been considered important to move the dredge (borrow) area closer to the fill area in order to enhance dredging performance and achieve cost-effectiveness. During the first Scoping Meeting, which was cancelled by EPA stating that the project justifications were not clear, EPA identified that the borrow area needs to be moved as far as possible from the proposed quaywall as there may be stability issues. Taking this concern into consideration, further alternatives to the borrow area were also considered by the Proponent in consultation with the Contractor and the representatives of Nilandhoo people. During discussions with the Council and people of Nilandhoo, they have raised concern regarding the need to protect the proposed harbour, which would involve huge costs if the proposed option were adopted although it had been mentioned in the original EIA that harbour protection will be considered in the future. Therefore, in order to reduce the overall cost of the proposed project and to increase the usability of the proposed harbour even during rough southwest monsoon, appropriate alternatives were considered to the harbour design as well although it is beyond the scope of this EIA. A number of alternatives to the proposed harbour design was considered in the original EIA report. Of these, the option of upgrading the existing harbour on the northwest has been given due consideration in the light of improving on social concerns related to limitations in land reclamation. An alternative analysis that have been done in the original EIA and during the current Addendum indicated that the preferred alternative to redesign the existing harbour would have several advantages over the proposed especially the ease of use during rough southwest monsoon while leaving the possibility of an external quaywall if it becomes necessary at a later stage. However, some stakeholders believe that the proposed option has advantages over the preferred alternative as it has better opportunities for future expansion and growth of the economic potential of the island. Some of the other alternatives considered in the original EIA report including the expansion of existing harbour on the northeast to the northwest has cost advantages while it has restrictions over future expansion that the recommended alternative in this Addendum provides. Environmental impacts were assessed for both the construction and operational phases of the project. Most of the direct, negative environmental impacts identified for the construction phase of the project were minor negative; the main impact being the impact on sedimentation from the proposed borrow area to the coral colonies in the vicinity and more importantly sedimentation during the filling of the proposed fill areas, which have already been covered in the original EIA report. Therefore, the impact of dredging has been considered in this Addendum. The main impact arising from the proposed new dredge area is the damage to the inner reef as a result of the dredging. There was a concern relating to the closeness of the dredge area to the proposed quaywall and the potential failure of the structure due to a collapse of the sides of the dredged basin. However, since the dredged basin would need to be dredged to less than 4m from the existing seabed, which is less than 6m in depth at present, there should not be such a problem. Only a few berths or quaywalls just adjacent to the reef edge dropping to 30m suddenly have failed whereas the proposed structure is over 110m from the dredge area, which will be dredged to only about 10m and not more than 13m under the current proposal. Furthermore, most of the naturally deep lagoon areas in similar islands would be about 10m in the middle areas with some areas having 15m depths. Therefore, the direct removal of some of the corals due to proposed option can be avoided by not dredging from the inner reef flat areas but the deep lagoon only, as in the proposed alternative. Reclamation of land considering current and future potential use is a favoured development activity in many islands today. However, based on the experience of most of the land reclaimed in many islands, the cost recovery of the project is low and taxpayers have reason to question the outcome of the project. Yet, if the project objectives were achieved by renting the reclaimed land for semi-industrial activities and housing developments, it may be a justifiable cost. It is sad to note that the proposed reclaimed land has yet to find itself a landuse plan and development scenario after several months of EIA approval that had passed by. This is a cause for concern in terms of the afore-mentioned socio-economic impact of the project, although it is beyond the scope of the EIA. If the land is appropriately managed, the project is considered to have several socio-economic benefits that will certainly outweigh the negative environmental impacts, which are of low significance. Although the impacts are not significant due to the absence of sensitive ecological elements that would be directly impacted, some project-specific mitigation measures have been discussed. These include consideration of the preferred alternative (which is also the or one of the alternatives discussed in the original EIA report) to mitigate the impacts of wave activity at the proposed quaywall, to consider shore protection as the reclamation progresses to minimize erosion and to move any live corals that may be directly affected into safer locations. General mitigation measures, involving appropriate construction management such as working during low-tide as much as possible and rigorous supervision during project implementation are also recommended. It is recommended to carry out regular monitoring as proposed in this Addendum, which replaces the monitoring programme given and approved in the original EIA report. It would be important to assess the movement of the sediment plume regularly and to ensure that sediment plume does not severely affect the reef areas. Turbidity levels are expected to be measured within the sedimentation zone on a regular basis up to 6 months after the project. In conclusion, it appears justified, from a technical and environmental point of view, to carry out the proposed project. Since alternatives have not been considered or discussed with the relevant stakeholders including the Council, it is recommended to consider all potential alternatives, including those identified by the EIA Consultants, before proceeding with the project. The preferred alternative borrow areas including the existing harbour on the northwest is recommended.Item First addendum to the environmental impact assessment for the proposed reclamation of Thinadhoo, Gaaf Dhaal Atoll, Maldives : change of borrow area(2016-05) Musthafa, AmirThis report is the Addendum to the EIA undertaken for the Proposed Reclamation of GDh. Thinadhoo, Maldives. This addendum is based on the change of borrow area after the sand search campaign has been undertaken. More details on the sand placing method is also provided in this addendum. An Environmental Impact Assessment was necessary for the works outlined in this report as they fall under the „Jadhuvalu R‟ of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 2012 of the Maldives. This report would further conform to the Dredging and Reclamation regulation. In addition to meeting the regulatory requirements, the report would further assist the proponent and important stakeholders to make decisions in an environmentally sound manner. The new dredging location is about 8 km west of the proposed borrow area 1 and area 3 given in the original EIA. The overall environmental impacts of the project have been assessed using frameworks found on literature and the results indicate that the proposed project has minimum negative impact and have an overall net positive outcome. The main environmental positive impacts due to this change comes from the fact that it is slightly far from the resort islands and sensitive areas, and therefore direct impact guests will be minimised. However, the change results in the borrow area being located relatively closer to the inhabited islands area, which also hosts a dive spot and a sensitive area. However, the dredging location is still over 1 km away from the inhabited area, while it is about 7km away from the nearest sensitive area. Dredging activities will no doubt increase sedimentation impacts in the area, although lasting impacts are not envisaged. There are no additional impacts due to reclamation as there is no change in scope with regards to this component. Furthermore, it is important to note that the approved dredge locations in the initial EIA were closer to the “Havodigalaa” sensitive area. Important new stakeholders for the project include Atoll council, nearby resorts, and Management at the Airports company, who may use the surrounding region of the borrow area. The stakeholders consulted did not have any significant reservations. However, they did note that the shallow reef North of the borrow area was used for bait fishing, and fishermen from Madaveli use the general area and channel for fishing. The management at the airports company inquired whether the height of the dredger would cause any issues to incoming aircrafts. Both these concerns were attended to and subsequently, the stakeholders did not have any further issues. The height of the ship will not cause any issue since the channel was south of Kaadedhoo was not going to be used, and all stakeholders will be preinformed before dredging commences. Alternative borrow area options are not viable as the sand search campaign concluded that there are no other significant sand depots within a reasonable distance from Thinadhoo. Alternative areas are those that have already been excluded. The only other viable alternative is to source sand from another region. Importing sand from abroad will be very costly and will have further negative impacts at the reclaim site. It is recommended to continue to monitor the impacts of the proposed project by regular monitoring of marine water quality. The monitoring plan proposed in the original EIA is slightly updated to include more monitoring locations, near borrow area. A two stage monitoring plan is given, which recommends quarterly monitoring during the 1st year and less frequent monitoring for the next 5 years. Undertaking the monitoring, along with the mitigation measures is necessary to ensure the sustainable development of the project with minimum harm to the environment. It is thus recommended that since the project has major socio-economic benefits and environmental benefits, it is advisable to allow the project to proceed as proposed. Moreover, since the change in scope is relatively small, and since the initial EIA has been approved, and also considering the fact that the sand search campaign resulted in only one location within reasonable distance from Thinadhoo to obtain sand, there is no viable reason to postpone or cancel the project due to this change.Item First addendum to the environmental impact assessment for the proposed reclamation of Feydhoo, Addu City, Maldives : change of borrow area(2016-05) Musthafa, AmirThis report is the Addendum to the EIA undertaken for the Proposed Reclamation of Feydhoo, Addu City, Maldives. This addendum is based on the change of borrow area after the sand search campaign has been undertaken. An Environmental Impact Assessment was necessary for the works outlined in this report as they fall under the ‘Jadhuvalu R’ of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 2012 of the Maldives. This report would further conform to the Dredging and Reclamation regulation. In addition to meeting the regulatory requirements, the report would further assist the proponent and important stakeholders to make decisions in an environmentally sound manner. The new dredging location is about 1.5km North of the proposed borrow area 1 given in the original EIA. The overall environmental impacts of the project have been assessed using frameworks found on literature and the results indicate that the proposed project has minimum negative impact and have an overall net positive outcome. The main environmental positive impacts due to this change comes from the fact that it is slightly far from the inhabited area, and therefore direct impact on inhabitants will be minimised. However, the change results in the borrow area being located relatively closer to the manta point, kuda kandu, and maa kandu, which a popular dive spot and sensitive areas respectively. However, the dredging location is still over 3-4km away from the sites. The area is slightly closer to the british loyalty wreck is also 3km away from the dredge area. Dredging activities will no doubt increase sedimentation impacts in the area, although lasting impacts are not envisaged. There are no additional impacts due to reclamation as there is no change in scope with regards to this component. Furthermore, it is important to note that the approved dredge locations in the initial EIA had similar distances away from other sensitive areas in the South. Important new stakeholders for the project include dive centres and fishermen who may use the surrounding region of the borrow area. While some dive centers had significant reservations and had been reported to be outright against the project taking place in the area, their reasons are not backed by sound science and there is simply a lack of information to conclude the dredging in this area will result in any lasting impact to the popular dive spots. Alternative borrow area options are not viable as the sand search campaign concluded that there are no other significant sand depots within Addu Atoll. Alternative areas are those that have already been excluded. The only other viable alternative is to source sand from another region. Importing sand from abroad will be very costly and will have further negative impacts at the reclaim site. It is recommended to continue to monitor the impacts of the proposed project by regular monitoring of marine water quality. The monitoring plan proposed in the original EIA is slightly updated to include more monitoring locations, near borrow area. A two stage monitoring plan is given, which recommends quarterly monitoring during the 1st year and less frequent monitoring for the next 5 years. Undertaking the monitoring, along with the mitigation measures is necessary to ensure the sustainable development of the project with minimum harm to the environment. It is thus recommended that since the project has major socio-economic benefits and environmental benefits, it is advisable to allow the project to proceed as proposed. Moreover, since the change in scope is relatively small, and since the initial EIA has been approved, and also considering the fact that the sand search campaign resulted in only one location within Addu Atoll to obtain sand, there is no viable reason to postpone or cancel the project due to this change.Item Environmental impact assessment for the proposed water supply and sewerage system in Hulhumalé Phase II, Malé City, Kaafu Atoll, Maldives(2016-02) SandcaysThis report discusses the findings of an environmental impact study under the proposed water supply and sewerage system project in the newly reclaimed Phase II of Hulhumalé. The project is proposed by Malé Water and Sewerage Company Ltd. The project entails establishment of a comprehensive water and sewerage system in Hulhumalé Second Phase. The proposed system is similar to the existing system in phase 1 and includes the provision of water and sewerage services to all of the proposed neighbourhoods and commercial areas including the proposed Tourism District, Yacht Marina and Knowledge Park. The project takes place in the newly reclaimed phase 2 of Hulhumalé on the north of existing phase 1. Hulhumalé is part of the nation’s capital Malé, developed as a separate island but soon to be connected by the largest bridge in the Maldives. The existing size of the island is approximately 320 hectares including the reclaimed area of Phase 2. Hulhumalé is the most planned development in the Greater Malé Region so far. The proposed water supply system incorporates desalination facility with a total capacity of 10,000 m3 per day to be installed in different phases of the project. All requested facilities will be provided with metered connections. HDPE pipes will be laid on the roads as shown. In addition, a number of alternatives to the proposed project components have been identified in this document. Some of these alternatives consider alternative means of wastewater disposal including ground disposal, alternative means of water supply and alternative outfall locations. The most preferable alternative to the proposed desalination only water scheme is integration of a rainwater harvesting component. Though this alternative has few advantages over the proposed, at this stage in development of Hulhumale’ Phase II, it would be impractical to implement it. It has also been recommended to use solar desalination technologies since the initial demand would be low and production capacity minimal. Environmental impacts were assessed for both the construction and operational phase of the project. Most of the environmental impacts identified for the construction phase of the project were minor negative; these include excavation and its impact on the landscape of reclaimed land and sedimentation from installing the outfalls. However, the impacts identified for the operational phase of the project were mostly moderate to major positive; averting possible contamination and salinization of ground water and reduction of related health hazards. Disposal of sewage via a sea outfall is considered as minor negative impact while the alternative of disposing to ground has numerous major negative impacts. The provision of safe and adequate supply of potable water enhances living environment and provides economic opportunities such as tourism establishments including guest houses and city hotels. The main mitigation measures for this project during the construction phase are similar to other water and sewerage projects such as dust control plans, working during low- tide as much as possible and rigorous supervision. The design shall also ensure that dewatering is minimized. As for the operational phase trained maintenance staff to service the water and sewerage system and regular check-ups has been suggested in addition to monitoring water quality as well as reef health for potential impacts. In conclusion, it appears justified from a technical, administrative, socio-economic, health and an environmental point of view, to carry out the proposed water and sewerage system development project. It is recommended to proceed the project as proposed.Item Environmental impact assessment for the proposed water supply system in Thimarafushi, Thaa Atoll, Maldives(2016-11) Development Collaborative PartnershipThis Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report is prepared in accordance with the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation 2012 to assess the impacts of proposed development of water supply system at Th. Thimarafushi. This project is proposed by Ministry of Environment and Energy and the impact assessment was carried out by consultants from DCP Pvt. Ltd., lead by lead consultant Amir Musthafa. The construction stage of the project will be undertaken by Puritas Pvt. Ltd. This impact assessment will identify and determine the significance of potential impact of each major component of the proposed project. Any activity that has a significant impact will be justified and alternatives will be proposed in terms of location and design to mitigate any adverse impact. The project proposes a water supply system based on desalination and rainwater harvesting. Feed water will be obtained from boreholes drilled over 30m deep. Brine will be discharge in front of the plant facility, 100m away from the beach line. Rainwater will be used to support the RO plant system. The main justification for the project is due to the decrease in quality of the groundwater in the island, as is the case in most islands in the Maldives and therefore to provide continuous supply of freshwater to the public. The integrated water supply system is not designed to cater for the airport facility. The total water production capacity at the facility will be 120 m3/day. The water supply system is designed to cater for 35 years. Thimarafushi is an island that has undergone significant development in recent history. There has been a major reclamation project as well as airport development. The proposed project will not need to have any significant vegetation removed as there are no such vegetation at the site. Considering the marine environment, there are no significant live corals that could be impacted along the proposed brine discharge location. The proposed site is far away from population center, and therefore will not have any significant impact on the residential environment. During the stakeholder consultations, all the major stakeholders were quite positive on the project. Their main need was for the project to commence soon. There were other minor concerns that could be attended easily during the implementation of the project. EPA did not that designing the project in such a way that it caters for the airport facility would make the project more feasible and ensure the facility is maintained at a higher level. Regarding impacts, moderate impacts are expected at the commencement of the project during mobilization and use of heavy machinery and setting up site for the proposed project. Due to the absence of notable environmental features at the site, the construction stage will not have a significant negative impact. However, waste management will be an issue as is always the case. Impacts of note include noise pollution, loss of visual amenity, potential damage to existing cables, health and safety issues, groundwater degradation, marine water quality degradation, impact on marine life, etc. However, most of these impacts were regarded as minor. Major impacts include those due to accidents, for which the probability of occurrence is less. Mitigation measures were proposed for all impacts. Mitigation measures included following proper safety procedures at site including wearing proper safety clothing, informing the council and community of the project details beforehand, getting information of existing cables from service providers, proper storage of waste and hazardous chemicals, ensuring the quality of water treatment. It is also proposed to place the discharge pipe with ballast blocks to prevent movement of the pipeline during heavy wave activity. Considering the impacts from the project, it appears that the project would not lead to any long term detrimental impact. On the other hand, the project has several positive impacts to the community including improving the health and lifestyle of the public, improving industries such as tourism and agriculture, thereby facilitating economic growth. Alternatives for the project including the no project option were also considered. However, it was recommended the project proceeds as proposed based on the feasibility of implementation and the small change to environmental impact that the alternatives will bring. A monitoring plan has been formulated and will be used to assess the impacts of the proposed system. It is planned that ground water, seawater, and product water will be tested regularly at predefined locations. Findings from the monitoring program will be used to re-evaluate the mitigation measures to reduce any significant negative impact on the environment. The overall environmental impacts of the project have been assessed using peer reviewed methodology and the results indicated that the proposed project has net positive impact. Given that the project has major socio-economic benefits, minor environmental impacts in addition to improving the health and wellbeing of the community; it is recommended to allow the project to proceed as proposed.Item Environmental impact assessment : Tower C of Amin Avenue, Hulhumale’(2016-01) Zuhair, Mohamed; Shakir, IbrahimThis Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report has been prepared for the development of Tower C, which is the third block to be developed as part of the 3 mixed-use residential and commercial complexes of Amin Avenue to be developed in Hulhumale’ by Amin Construction Pvt. Ltd.. The proposed Tower C development will be undertaken in a separate 14 storey building in the land plot N2-23 in Neighborhood 2. Upon completion of Tower C, the complex will have 72 apartments. The Ground and First Floors of the complex will be developed for commercial plots, parking lots and access ways, similar to Tower A and B. This EIA is prepared as per the Terms of Reference (TOR) approved by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on 16 December 2015. It is a legal requirement under the Amended EIA Regulation to prepare and approve EIAs for commercial, economic and development projects enlisted in Schedule D. Environmental clearance is obtained through approval of the EIA and issuance of EIA Decision Statement from EPA. The Tower C of Amin Avenue will be developed in Neighborhood 2 of Hulhumale’ in the land plot N2-23, which is located at 4°12'49.14"N / 73°32'25.66"E. The total land area of N2- 23 is 19,779ft2. The plot is located on the southern side of the proposed park located in the central parts of Hulhumale’. In order to understand existing environmental conditions of the proposed Tower C plot, assessments have been undertaken including noise levels, traffic flow and volume, ecological and structural assessments, groundwater and soil assessments. As Tower C is located within the overall Amin Avenue development boundary, comparison of some of the data collected for the EIA for Towers A and B with EIA for Tower C has been undertaken. Similar to the previous assessments, the highest noise levels recorded were from the northern side of the land plot having 76dB and 78dB. However, readings for the same locations during the previous assessment showed 69dB and 67dB, hence there is an increase in the noise levels of the surrounding environment. This is primarily attributed to the ongoing construction works at Towers A and B as well as other nearby sites. The average noise levels recorded on the southern sides were also increased from 62dB (previous) to 66dB (new) and from 61dB (previous) to 68dB (new). The increased noise levels on the southern side were also attributed to the ongoing construction activities for the development of Towers A and B. Generally, the traffic volume was observed to have decreased from the previous survey. This is probably due to the time where the data was collected and the period in which the data was collected where it was school holidays, hence there is a general reduction in the traffic volume of the surrounding environment. However, volume of pickups and trucks has increased from 7 to 8 and from 5 to 6 in the recent survey. There is no vegetation found within the plot allocated for Tower C development. Hence, there are no issues with vegetation clearance as part of the proposed development. A soil pit was dug within the land plot allocated for Tower C development, which indicate that generally there are no soil layers. The soil profiles show that up to the water level, only reclaimed sand exists. As there is no vegetation found within the site, the topsoil also does not have any humus content. A groundwater analysis was carried out for the Tower C location from MWSC laboratories, which indicated that the groundwater found within the site contains average levels of nitrates having 20.5mg/l. Phosphate levels found were 0.05mg/l and sulphide levels were less than 5 miccrograms/l. The salinity level was only 0.44ppt. However, high levels of dissolved solids having 451mg/l and turbidity level of 4.52NTU was found in the groundwater. Also, high levels of faecal coliforms having 308CFU were found from the groundwater at the site. Currently some social housing units and flats are found within the vicinity of the project sites which are observed to be quite new and in good condition. No physical damages have been observed from these buildings. These buildings are found on the eastern side of the Tower C plot and the overall development area. Condition of the roads around the proposed project site is observed to be in good condition. No cracks or physical damages are observed on the roads. The environmental impacts that may be associated with the proposed project are predicted and assumed in the EIA Report. These environmental impacts are divided into construction phase and operation phase environmental impacts. Most of the construction phase environmental impacts are believed to occur from excavation, dewatering, construction activities, operation of construction machinery and vehicles and construction waste disposal. The main environmental impacts believed to occur during operation phase of the project include household waste and increased traffic within and around areas. As part of the proposed project, a number of mitigation measures have been proposed in the EIA Report including using corrugated sheets supported by iron beams as a safety measure for protecting the excavated area for foundation, dewatering will be undertaken in opens spaces in Hulhumale to reduce loss of ground water, while preparing the site ready for construction, measures such as installation of safety and dust protection nets, appropriate signage will be placed to make aware people on the development. Also, important mitigation measures that will be implemented include complete elimination of waste disposal during construction and operation stages of the development into the project boundaries as well as promotion of a greener lifestyle have identified important aspects of the proposed development. The overall environmental performance will be monitored by an environmental monitoring framework that will be implemented as part of the proposed development of Tower C of Amin Avenue. Although during construction of the project, negative environmental impacts from construction activities have been envisaged, with appropriate environmental management and mitigation measures, these impacts will be reduced to a considerable level. Also, with positive socio-economic outlook of the project and considering the overall importance of such a development in Hulhumale’ to alleviate housing stress, it is concluded that the project should go ahead as planned.