Academic Articles -- ޢިލްމީ ލިޔުންތަކުގެ ޖަމާ
Browse
87 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 Environmental impact assessment for the proposed development of an agricultural island Dhurureha Thaa Atoll, Maldives(2017-09) SandcaysThis report discusses the findings of a social and environmental impact study under the proposed development of agriculture on Dhururehaa, Thaa Atoll. The project is proposed by Mohamed Latheef. The proponent aims at developing Dhurureha as an agricultural island; providing job opportunities, reducing dependency on imported produce and ultimately working towards economic diversification and growth of Maldivian economy. The agricultural activities on Dhurureha will be carried out in greenhouses as a hydroponics system. A total of 12 greenhouses (100ft by 50ft each) is proposed to be built for growing tomato, capsicum, bell pepper and lettuce. Additionally, a 60m by 30m nursery will be built on the island. Access to the island is to be provided by dredging an access channel and a 200m jetty. Water requirement for the project is to be met by utilizing an RO plant. A suitable size diesel generator will be used throughout the project to meet power requirement. Staff facilities such as accommodation, mesh room, mosque and office building will also be constructed on the island. A cold storage, general storage and small packaging facility will also be constructed on the island during construction stage. A waste collection and management station will be established for using during construction phase and operational phase of the project At present, Dhurureha is an uninhabited island not used for any purpose. However, locals of the nearby communities use the island to collect coconuts, go on picnics and gather firewood. Alternatives to project components have been identified in the project document. These include alternative uses of the island such as for a tourist resort. However, upon closer analysis of these options, the proposed development of the island for agricultural purpose was found to be more viable based on the present circumstances under which the island has been leased. Therefore, the consultants propose exploring use of alternative renewable sources to the proposed fuel based energy generation. Environmental impacts were assessed for both the construction and operation phase of the project. Most of the environmental impacts of the project have been identified as minor negative with highly positive socio-economic impacts. The main negative impacts from the project include habitat loss from vegetation clearance, sedimentation and consequent impacts on marine wildlife health and waste generation during the operational phase. The mitigation measures outlined for these impacts include conserving mature trees to the greatest possible extent, relocating large live corals at the proposed access channel area and establishing dust control plans in addition to employing best-practice guidelines during the operational phase. The most positive socio-economic impacts related to the project are increase in job opportunities, reduction in prices of agricultural produce and increase of national revenue. It is inevitable that there would be some negative environmental impacts. However, most of the impacts of the proposed project are minor compared to the positive socio-economic benefits of the proposed system. Yet, monitoring to ensure the effectiveness of the proposed project would be necessary. Therefore, a monitoring component has been suggested which takes in to consideration, the most important elements that require regular checks. This monitoring component will be adhered to and will allow the assessment of changes due to construction and implementation of the proposed agriculture project. Monitoring is specifically focussed on employment opportunities, price changes in the market, direct and indirect economic ventures, ground and marine water quality, changes in the hydrodynamics of the project area as well as impacts on the reef or marine ecological area of importance. In conclusion, it appears justified from a technical and environmental point of view, to carry out the proposed project to develop Dhurureha as an agricultural island.Item Environmental impact assessment proposed milkfish aquaculture project Matu, Gaafu Alif Atoll(2017-07) SandcaysThis report addresses the environmental concerns of the proposed milkfish (Chanos chanos) hatchery project in Ga. Matu. The project is proposed by Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture. Concerns about live-bait availability over prolonged periods are being raised in recent years, especially in the southern atolls of Maldives. The development of aquaculture for selected bait species is seen as one possible measure to manage the live bait shortage currently faced by local fishermen. Cultured milkfish has been in use for the longlining industry in different parts of the world, and successfully piloted for the pole-and-line industry in Indonesia and Kiribati. Unlike most of the live bait species currently in use in the pole-and-line fishery, hatchery technology is well developed for milkfish. In addition, the relatively short duration to reach bait-size makes milkfish an ideal species for aquaculture development. Supplementing the tuna fishermen with cultured bait is expected to reduce the time spent on bait search, and in turn, result in increased effort directed to the tuna fishery. As live bait shortage is mostly reported from the southern atolls, the proposed hatchery site was selected from Gaafu Alif atoll, for logistical ease in distribution for the most needed areas can be made. The selected island, Matu from Ga. Atoll is 5.9 Ha small uninhabited island on the northern side of Ga.Atoll. The closest inhabited islands to the project site are Ga. Villingili and Kolamaafushi. The project aims to produce 100 tons of milkfish raised to the size of live bait used in the pole-and-line fishery. All required technical and support infrastructure will be constructed during the construction phase of the project. The operational phase will involve water circulation, feeding and rearing of cultured stock. In addition to hatchery, nursery and broodstock modules built on land, sea cages will be built for brood stock. Power will be provided for the project via diesel generators, while potable water will be provided via RO plants. Accommodation for staff and administrative buildings and waste management centre will also be constructed on the island. Access to the island will be provided via access channel and a jetty. The naturally deep lagoon will be used as a harbour during the project. Social and environmental concerns regarding the proposed project include: • Vegetation clearance during site preparation for construction of land infrastructures. This impact is considered minor negative as outmost care will be taken to reduce cutting down mature vegetation. Buildings will be adjusted as much as possible to reduce requirement of cutting or relocation of mature trees. When unavoidable, two plants for every tree cut will be planted on the island. • Sedimentation during excavation of access channel and construction of main jetty. This impact is considered as negligible as the excavation involved is very minor. Measures to reduce this impact such as working during calm weather and low-tide has been suggested as mitigation measures. • Minor impacts due to human activity in the area including littering both during construction and operational phases. • Increased nutrient loadings from faeces and uneaten food wastes, which will either dissolve or settle on the seabed beneath the cage. Since the water is deep and adequate currents exist, eutrophication is, however, unlikely. The proposed project is expected to be managed in conformity with local and international regulations and standards of relevance, especially environmental regulations and standards. Therefore, environmental impacts will be well managed, minimized and mitigated. Given that the project has major socio-economic benefits and some environmental benefits (potential to reduce pressure on wild populations of baitfish), it is recommended to allow the project to proceed as proposed. It is important to consider uncertainties and continue to monitor the project impacts and undertake appropriate mitigation measures in consultation with the EPA and other relevant government agencies. It is also necessary to undertake regular environmental monitoring activities.Item Addendum 1 for environmental impact assessment of Hulhule-Hulhumale connecting link road development project in North Male‟, Atoll(2017-09) Water SolutionsThis report discusses the findings for the first addendum of the environmental impact assessment undertaken by Water Solutions Pvt. Ltd for undertaking the construction of the link road project between Hulhule-Hulhumale.. The project is proposed by Housing Development Corporation (HDC). The island of Hulhumale has been an important growth centre since its development. Presently, Hulhumale is the fastest growing urban centre and has residential as well as industrial developments to a scale that has never been experienced anywhere in the Maldives. Being close to Male‟ and the airport, Hulhumale has been attracting migrants from all over the Maldives. Construction of the Male‟ to Hulhule Bridge is presently the biggest infrastructure project of its kind under construction in Maldives. This project is very much tied with the present link road as this link road will provide direct connection of Hullhumale and the bridge, ultimately making the traffic flow from Hulhumale to Male‟. This road will be constructed on the east side of the existing land mass of Hulhule airport by reclaiming a small area further west of the existing island. The proposed road will consists of three zones. The details of the link road project is given in the Environmental Impact Assessment Report which is prepared by Water Solutions in August 2017 and the reason for the preparation of this first addendum report is due the change in location of sand burrow areas. In the Environmental Impact Assessment Report it was said that the sand will be obtained from the Hulhumale‟ phase 2, phase 1 and Maldives Airports Company Limited (MACL). However now that idea has been dropped out and it is now planned to obtain sand from the eastern side of Uthuru Thila Falhu and the bathymetry shows the depth varies between 40 to 60 meters approximately. The details of the geographic coordinates are given in the section project descriptions and Study Area. This lagoon has been used as a sand burrow area for previous similar projects and is estimated to dredge 410,000 cubic meters of sand from this location. The dredging project is subcontracted to the Dredging International (Cyprus) and it is estimated to complete the project in five to seven days. Environmental impacts were assessed and most of the environmental impacts of the project have been identified as resulting mainly from the coral reef damage caused by reclamation of additional land. Mitigation measures for the negative impacts have been identified and outlined in detail, especially sedimentation control methods. The most important mitigation measure is the use of bund walls in the fill areas. This EIA addendum was undertaken to assess the environmental impacts of the proposed dredging and reclamation to acquire more land for the link road construction project. Based on the assessment, it has been identified that the major impacts of the project will be felt on the marine environment during the dredging and discharging of sand. This EIA addendum report also highlights some of the studies and research work undertaken in similar environments, especially in Male‟، to understand the impacts of reclamation and construction works close to reef slope and how this knowledge can be transferred to similar environments based on the type of coastal protection methods in use. The mitigation measures are provided in the report with alternatives. It is vital to conduct the activities, during both project planning and construction phase, in line with mitigation measures emphasized in the report. Socio-economic impacts of the proposed project will be immense as direct land connection of Male‟ and Hulhumale would bring significant benefits to the general public. Connection of Hulhumale, Male‟ and the airport is a vital transportation link that would save time and money for more than 200,000 people residing in the greater Male‟ region. The environmental impacts of various projects that are currently being undertaken in the airport region have caused significant damage to reef in various areas. This project will also have its impacts, but the impacts will not be anything greater than to what the environment has already been subjected to. Therefore a comprehensive monitoring programme has been suggested which covers components of coastal and marine environment to assess how the critical components of this project will affect the environment and to what extent. It is important to follow this monitoring programme not only to comply with the regulation but also to ensure that the impacts are measures in realistic terms. Though some of the components of this project contravenes with the Dredging and reclamation regulation; the amendments brought to the regulation facilitates that this project could be implemented. Hulhule island is a special zone and Under clause 10 of the dredging and reclamation regulation, special projects are exempted. As the environmental consultants, it is our opinion that this project should be allowed to proceed as the environmental impacts of this project does not pose serious concerns to the natural environment. It is a project that has far greater socio-economic benefits than these limited environmental impacts.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.