CHAPTER 8 ADDITIONAL STUDIES

8/6/2019 CHAPTER 8 ADDITIONAL STUDIES

1/91

Chapter 8EIA Study of Navi Mumbai International Airport Sheet 1 of 91

CESE, IIT Mumbai CIDCO

Chapter-8

Additional Studies8.0 INTRODUCTION

Based on the TOR specified by the Ministry of Environment & Forest, number of

additional studies was carried out to fulfill the requirement of EIA study. The studies

are:

a) Legal Opinion on Permissibility of Activities in CRZ Area.

b) Re-coursing Channel.

c) Re-orientation of runway study.

d) Ground Water Study.

e) Vaghvli Island and coastal line study.

f) Mathematical & Physical Model study.

g) Mangrove analysis, plantation and management study.

h) Air & Noise Assessment.

i) Rehabilitation & Re-settlement ( R & R ) Plan

8.1 Legal Opinion on Permissibility of Activities in CRZ Area

The various activities, such as, mangrove cutting/destruction, diversion and training

of rivers, quarrying and cutting of mountain and earth, reclamation, alteration in tidal

pattern, permissibility of airport related activities pointed out in the approved Terms

of Reference prescribed by Ministry of Environment & Forest for Environment

Impact Assessment (EIA) needs to be examined legally in the light of CRZ

Regulation, 1991 Notification as amended upto 15th May, 2009. Our legal

Consultant, M/s.Hemant Sahai & Associates, one of the top 5 Law Firms of India in

the field of Projects, Infrastructure & Energy, have examined the permissibility of

above activities and offered their legal opinion quoted below:

BACKGROUND FACTS :

1. City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Limited

(CIDCO) has been appointed as the nodal agency for implementation of the

Navi Mumbai International Airport (NMIA). The site selected for the Project

falls in the Navi Mumbai area and certain parts of the site fall within the

Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) as per the approved Coastal Zone


2/91



Management Plan (the CZMP) of Navi Mumbai. CIDCO has presented its

proposals before the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority

(MCZMA) and subsequently before the Ministry of Environment and Forests

(MoEF) for CRZ clearance and approval of the Terms of Reference (TOR)

for environment clearance, respectively. The MCZMA has recommended the

case to the MoEF for CRZ clearance. The MoEF has finalized the TOR for

project for carrying E.I.A. study for environment clearance.

2. We also understand that the land area earmarked for the development of the

NMIA includes land which is intended to be developed for aeronautical

related activities as well as for non - aeronautical activities such as office,

residential and other economic activities for supporting the airport.

Furthermore we have also been given to understand that to make available

the land required for the proposed airport development CIDCO proposes to

train and divert two rivers viz. Gadhi and Ulwe that presently run their

respective courses through the proposed site for the NMIA.

3. Diverse correspondence has been exchanged between CIDCO, MCZMA,

MoEF and other authorities, the relevant ones of which have been referred to

in our opinion herein below.

4. CIDCO has sought our opinion generally on several issues and in particular

on the following issues :

(i) Mangrove cutting/destruction

(ii) Diversion & Training of rivers

(iii) Quarrying & cutting of mountain and earth.

(iv) Reclamation

(v) Alteration in tidal pattern

(vi) Clarification required related to High Court Orders on destruction of

mangrove.

(vii) Permissibility of airport related activities (such as, office, residential,

Hotel, etc.).

5. In the above background, we have been asked to provide our legal opinion

on diverse issues relating to the environmental aspects of the project. These

queries can broadly be classified under the following heads :


3/91



(i) Legal interpretation of the CRZ Notification dated 19 February, 1991 as

amended vide order/circular bearing number S.O.114 (E) dated 15 May,

2009;

(ii) What permissible construction and other activities can be undertaken by the

developer of the airport/CIDCO on the airport project site;

(iii) Steps to be taken by CIDCO in relation to the presence of mangroves on the

site, especially in view of the judgment of the Honble High Court of Bombay

dated 6 October, 2005 in W.P (lodging) No.3246/2004 later renumbered as

PIL No. 87 of 2006;

(iv) Any other issues.

DOCUMENTS REVIEWED :

1. We have examined the following documents and statutes:

(i) In principal approval of the Ministry of Civil Aviation dated 6 July 2007 for

setting up Green Field Airport at Navi Mumbai

(ii) GoM GR dated 30 July 2008 granting approval to the Airport at Navi Mumbai.

(iii) Gazette Notification S.O No.1243 (E) dated 15 May 2009 regarding

amendment of CRZ Notification, 1991;

(iv) CRZ Notification, 1991 issued by MoEF vide S.O 114 (E) with amendment

upto 15 May 2009 [except S.O 635(E)];

(v) Mumbai High Court Order dated 6 October 2005 in W.P (lodging)

No.3246/2004;

(vi) High Court Order dated 29 April 2009 in Notice of Motion 116/2009in PIL No.

87/ 2006;

(vii) High Court Order dated 28 July 2008 in Notice of Motion Nos. 538/ 2006 and

245/ 2006 in PIL W.P No. 87/ 2007;

(viii) High Court Order dated 8 October 2008 in Notice of Motion Nos. 538/ 2006

and 245/ 2006 in PIL W.P No. 87/ 2007;

(ix) Proposed Terms of Reference (Proposed TOR) dated 16 June 2009 by

CIDCO to MoEF.

(x) Draft report on the Re-orientation of Runways to save mangroves

(xi) Plans depicting proposed amendments to the approved Navi Mumbai CZMP

submitted by CIDCO to MCZMA for CRZ Clearance


4/91



(xii) Letter dated 3 July 2009 by CIDCO to MCZMA requesting for CRZ Clearance

and setting out action taken and summary of the studies undertaken by

CIDCO.

(xiii) Presentation by CIDCO dated 16 July, 2009 and its minutes of the 54th

Meeting of the MCZMA dated 16 July 2009 (Minutes);

(xiv) Presentation by CIDCO dated 21 July 2009 to the Expert Appraisal

Committee (EAC), MoEF on NMIA;

(xv) Minutes of 78th Meeting held on 20 to 22 July 2009 of the EAC for CRZ,

Infrastructure Development and Miscellaneous projects; and

(xvi) Terms of Reference (TOR) dated 4 August 2009 issued by the Expert

Advisory Committee (EAC) of the Ministry of Environment and Forest

(MoEF);

(xvii) Letter dated 7 August 2009 by MCZMA to the MoEF recommending the

proposal of CIDCO for the development of NMIA along with the Minutes of its

54th Meeting;

(xviii) Airport Authority of India Act, 1994 (the AAI Act);

(xix) Aircraft Act, 1934 (the Act);

(xx) Information furnished during conferences.

A. Legal interpretation of the CRZ Notification dated 19 February, 1991and

amendment dated 15 May 2009 to the CRZ notification.

1. By virtue of the CRZ Notification dated 19 February, 1991 (the Notification)

the Central Government has declared the coastal stretches of seas, bays,

estuaries, creeks, rivers, and backwaters which are influenced by tidal action

in the landward side upto 500/100 (in creek area) metres from the High Tide

Line (HTL) and the land between the Low Tide Line (LTL) and the HTL as

Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ). The Central Government has further

imposed certain restrictions on the setting up and expansion of industries,

operations or processes within the CRZ.

2. The said Notification has been amended from time to time. Vide an

order/circular bearing number S.O.114 (E) dated 15 May, 2009 the Ministry of

Environment and Forests (the MoEF) amended the Notification and

exempted the development of the NMIA from the list of prohibited activities,

however, this exemption has been made subject to certain conditions,


5/91



including conducting of a detailed scientific study and incorporation of

adequate environmental safeguard measures for neutralizing damage to

coastal environment in the Navi Mumbai region.

3. The Proviso to clause (i) of paragraph 2 of the CRZ Notification dealing with

Prohibited Activities reads as follows Provided further that the development

of green field Airport at Navi Mumbai shall be undertaken subject to detailed

scientific study for incorporating adequate environmental safeguard measures

required for neutralizing damage to coastal environment as may be

appropriate to the Navi Mumbai region.

4. Hence, while the Notification discourages setting up of new industries and

expansion of existing industries within the CRZ, vide the amendment dated

15 May, 2009, the Notification specifically exempts the development of the

NMIA subject to the conditions stated above. It can also be observed that the

amendment to the Notification has factored in the possibility and obvious

impact/damage which will necessarily be caused to the coastal environment

in and surrounding the area earmarked for the development of NMIA. The

language of the Notification clearly implies that the Developer of the NMIA is

expected to develop the NMIA all the while ensuring that adequate

environmental safeguard measures are adopted to neutralize the damage

that will necessarily be caused due to the development activities.

B. What are the permissible construction and other activities that can be

undertaken by the developer of the airport/CIDCO on the airport project site?

1. For the purposes of developing the NMIA at the site selected for the airport, CIDCO

would be required to undertake several activities such as land reclamation, bunding,

training of rivers etc. The provisions of clause (viii) of paragraph 2 of the said

Notification dated 19 February, 1991 specifically prohibits - Land reclamation,

bunding or disturbing the natural course of sea water except where required for

construction, modernization or expansion of ports, harbours, and for other

facilities that are essential for activities permissible under the notification. Since the

development of the NMIA is exempted as a prohibited activity under the Notification

and the activities related to its development would be termed as essential, the

restrictions in this clause would not be applicable to the NMIA project, i.e. the

Developer/CIDCO will be permitted to undertake construction including training &


6/91



diverting the natural course of creek water for developing the airport and its various

facilities including aeronautical and non-aeronautical activities.

2. It may also be noted that the proviso to clause (viii) of paragraph 2 specifically

provides that reclamation for commercial purposes such as shopping, housing

complexes, hotels and entertainment activities shall not be permissible.

Furthermore, Clause (xi) of paragraph 2 of the CRZ Notification dated 19 February,

1991 prohibits construction activities except as permitted in the Coastal Area

Classification and Development Regulations (the Regulations). The Regulations

classify the coastal areas within 500 meters of the HTL on the landward side into

four categories/ zones CRZ-I, CRZ-II. CRZ-III and CRZ-IV, for the purpose of

regulating development activities in such areas.

(a) Category I (CRZ-I) includes areas that are (i) ecologically sensitive and

important and (ii) Area between the LTL and the HTL.

(b) Category II (CRZ-II) includes areas that are already developed up to and

close to the shoreline

(c) Category III (CRZ-III) includes areas that are relatively undisturbed and those

which do not belong to either Category I or II.

(d) Category IV (CRZ- IV) includes the coastal stretches in the Andaman and

Nicobar, Lakshwadeep and small islands, except those designated as CRZ-I,

CRZ-II or CRZ-III.

3. The Regulations specify various norms to regulate permissible activities as well as

the development/ construction activities in the different categories set out above, at

the State/ Union Territory (UT) level. The relevant norms are as follows:

(a) CRZ- I: For areas between the HTL and the LTL falling in the CRZ- I

category, and which are not ecologically sensitive and important, the

development of the Greenfield airport and related activities at Navi Mumbai is

permitted.

(b) CRZ- II: For areas falling in CRZ-II category, the development/ construction of

facilities for receipt and storage of petroleum products such as Aviation Fuel,

High Speed Diesel; and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) is permitted. Further the

development of the Greenfield airport and related activities at Navi Mumbai

may also be permitted in these areas.

(c) CRZ- III: For areas falling in CRZ-III category, the development of the

Greenfield airport and related activities at Navi Mumbai is permitted. Further


7/91



the development of vacant plots between 200 and 500 metres of the HTL in

designated areas may be permitted with the prior approval of the MoEF for

construction of hotels/ beach resorts for temporary occupation of tourists/

visitors subject to the conditions set out in clause 7(1) of the Notification

dated 19 February, 1991, in this behalf.

4. Therefore, on the face of it, in view of the aforesaid provisions, it would appear that

the development of the NMIA is permitted in CRZ-I (ii), CRZ-II and CRZ-III.

However, in view of our discussions below, eventually these restrictions may not

apply to the project since, these and other restrictions specified in the CRZ

Notification dated 19 February, 1991 would be attracted only so long as an area

qualifies as a CRZ. Once an area ceases to be a CRZ, then the provisions of the

CRZ Notification dated 19 February, 1991 would cease to be applicable and

therefore, the restrictions under the aforesaid clauses of the Notification too would

not be applicable. Therefore it follows that, once the site or parts thereof of the NMIA

airport project cease to be a CRZ, the restrictions contained in the CRZ Notification

dated 19 February, 1991 would also cease to be applicable.

5. The first relevant issue to be considered in this context is - what constitutes a CRZ

area? The answer is provided in the CRZ Notification dated 19 February, 1991 itself,

which defines a CRZ area as follows - the Central Government hereby declares the

coastal stretches of seas, bays, estuaries, creeks, rivers and backwaters which are

influenced by tidal action (in the landward side) upto 500 meters from the High Tide

Line (HTL) and the land between the Low Tide Line (LTL) and the HTL as Coastal

Regulation Zone1;

6. A reading of the above definition clearly indicates that a CRZ is identified and

designated based on the tidal action of a specified water body, including a river that

is influenced by tidal action in the landward side. Thus any area falling within 500

meters from the HTL and also the land falling between the HTL and the LTL (the

Inter Tidal area) is defined as the CRZ.

7. To more clearly understand the import of the definition of a CRZ, the said notification

also describes the term HTL as, For the purposes of this notification, the HTL

means the line on the land upto which the highest water line reaches during the

1The definition of HTL was amended vide Notification S.O.550(E) dated 21.5.02.


8/91



spring tide2.Asper the said Notification, the HTL is to be demarcated uniformly in

all parts of the country by the demarcating authority or authorities so authorized by

the Central Government, in accordance with the general guidelines issued in this

regard. Similarly, the LTL is proposed to be defined as the line on land up to which

the lowest water line recedes during spring tide. The Notification further states that

the distance from the HTL shall apply to both sides in the case of rivers, creeks and

backwaters and the HTL may be modified on a case to case basis for reasons to be

recorded in writing while preparing the Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) of

the State. Therefore, a CRZ is to be determined with reference to the HTL and LTL

at the relevant site itself. It is also an admitted position that due to the flow and ebb

of the tidal action this demarcation would vary from time to time. Therefore, since

determination of an area as a CRZ is dependent on the basis of the tidal action of a

specified water body, implicitly such CRZ determination is dynamic and is amenable

to change depending on the ground conditions at a specific site, such as the site for

the NMIA.

8. A perusal of the site maps provided to us show that only certain sections in the

proposed site for the NMIA currently fall within the definition of a CRZ. These are the

areas around the rivers Gadhi and Ulwe (the said Rivers) that pass through the site

and which have been classified as CRZ in the CZMP for Navi Mumbai area as

approved by the MoEF. Thus, these areas around the said Rivers are the only

sections of the project site, to which the provisions of the CRZ Notification dated 19

February, 1991, including the restrictions on construction contained therein, will be

applicable. Further, factually the mountain area proposed to be razed to reclaim the

area under water and CRZ areas, falls in the non CRZ area of the airport area site.

Hence quarrying or cutting of the mountain would not attract the CRZ Notification.

The proposed activity would however have to be dealt with as a matter of course

under the provisions of the EIA notification while preparing the EIA report for the

project.

9. We understand that, as part of the airport development, it is proposed to train and

divert the said Rivers such that they run their individual courses well outside the

periphery of the said project site. It is clear that the training of the said rivers will

require prior MoEF approval. However, once the course of the said rivers are altered

2When the sun and moon are aligned, there are exceptionally strong gravitational forces, causing very high and very low tides

which are called spring tides, though they have nothing to do with the season.


9/91



with the approval of the MoEF, then clearly, the logical consequences would be that

the CRZ area too would have to be realigned and re-defined with reference to the

diverted course of the said rivers.

10. The Maharashtra State Government had submitted and got approved a Coastal

Zone Management Plan (CZMP) for Mumbai and Navi Mumbai respectively.

Realignment of the CRZ within an approved CZMP is permissible as is seen from

our discussions above. However this will require some minor changes in the

approved CZMP for Navi Mumbai. For this purpose the prior approval of the

MCZMA and the MoEF will be required.

11. The MCZMA has, vide the decisions taken in its 54th meeting and recorded in its

minutes dated 16 July, 2009, decided to recommend the case of NMIA to the MoEF.

This is further evidenced by the MCZMAs letter dated 7 August, 2009 to the MoEF,

recommending the case of the NMIA including, a recommendation that the said

Rivers be permitted to be trained and their course diverted, subject to certain

conditions specified therein. These recommendations are currently pending before

the MoEF.

12. We have been advised that diverting the course of the said Rivers is a necessary

and incidental activity to the development of the NMIA. Without re-alignment of the

said Rivers, the NMIA cannot be developed as is reflected by the analysis of the

studies carried out by CIDCO contained in the report on Re-Orientation of Runways

to save mangroves. We have also been made to understand that the said Rivers are

creeks which essentially channel creek water and are subject to the tidal actions of

the sea. As noted above, the MoEF has vide its order/circular bearing number

S.O.114 (E) dated 15 May, 2009 amended the CRZ Notification dated 19 February,

1991 and exempted the development of the NMIA from the list of prohibited

activities within a CRZ, subject to certain conditions. With this amendment, the

enabling provisions under the CRZ Notification dated 19 February, 1991 that permit,

inter alia, the disturbance of the natural course of creek water as required for

construction, modernization or expansion of ports, harbours, and for other

facilities that are essential for activities permissible under the notification will be

available to the NMIA project. Therefore, in our view, diversion of the said Rivers is a

permissible activity under the CRZ Notification dated 19 February, 1991, as

amended.


10/91



13. In the above circumstances, in our view, altering the course of the said rivers being

essential for construction of the NMIA airport and its facilities including the runways,

terminal etc, is therefore, a permissible activity under the Notification read with the

amendment dated 15 May, 2009. In our view, the MoEF will be required to grant its

approval to divert the said Rivers, however, in doing so, it may impose certain

conditions as recommended by the MCZMA, which will have to be complied with by

the Developer.

14. Once the said rivers are diverted, as above, the CRZ would be re-aligned along the

course of the diverted rivers and, based on the maps submitted by CIDCO to

MCZMA and forwarded to MoEF for CRZ clearance, the site would automatically

cease to be a CRZ (except for certain areas around the periphery/boundary of the

site along the trained and diverted Rivers.. Once the site ceases to be a CRZ, the

provisions of the CRZ Notification dated 19 February, 1991, including the restrictions

on construction contained therein, would cease to apply to the NMIA site.

C. Issues related to presence of Mangroves and Steps to be taken by CIDCO in

view of the judgment of the Bombay High Court

1. A perusal of the maps provided to us show that the mangrove growth within

the Airport Zone is of varying density and is limited to certain sections of the

Airport Zone. In order to carry out the proposed development within the

Airport Zone, deforestation of these mangroves appears to be imperative.

However, destruction of mangroves is expressly prohibited by the orders and

judgment of the Honble Bombay High Court3.

2. It is clear, therefore, that destruction of any mangroves for the development of

the NMIA will require a prior approval of the Bombay High Court. Some of the

relevant judgment and orders of the Bombay High Court having a bearing on

this issue are discussed below:

(i) Bombay High Court Order dated 12April 2005 in W.P No. 3246/ 2004 (PIL

87/2006) & 2208/2004:

This Writ Petition was filed with respect to mangroves being/ were in the

process of being indiscriminately destroyed in five areas in Mumbai, viz.,

3 Bombay High Court Order dated 6th October 2005 in W.P. (lodging) No. 3246/2004


11/91



Seven Bungalows, Andheri; Kanjurmarg; Link Road, Goregaon; Gorai; and

Malvani village, Malad. The Honble Court by virtue of this Order imposed a

freeze on further developmental activity in the area which would destruct or

denudate the mangroves. The Honble Court also directed the State of

Maharashtra not to sanction such activities and to seek the permission of the

Court before affording such sanctions.

(ii) Bombay High Court Order dated 6 October 2005 in W.P (lodging)

No.3246/2004 (PIL 87/2006:

This order was passed pursuant to the cited Public Interest Litigation filed by

NGOs like Bombay Environmental Action Group (BEAG) and others

seeking urgent measures for protection and preservation of the mangrove

forests in Maharashtra from systematic destruction by land grabbers and

encroachers. Several directions were issued by the Court under this order for

the protection, conservation and rejuvenation of mangroves and the State

Government was directed to designate a senior officer, the Collector and

Deputy Commissioner of Police/ Superintendent of Police (DCP/SP) to

oversee the implementation of the directions.

The Court inter alia, directedthe State to continue to use the services of the

Maharashtra Remote Sensing Application Centre (MRSAC) to prepare

Phase-II of the mangroves mapping study in order to precisely identify the

mangrove areas in the State and specifically in Mumbai and Navi Mumbai.

Thereafter the State was directed to use the data and transfer the details of

the mangroves on to the City Survey/ Village maps (Cadestral maps). On

transfer of the data the areas having mangroves and which were identified as

government owned, were to be declared as Protected Forests and the areas

having mangroves and which are identified as privately owned were to bedeclared and notified as Forests. The Forest Department was to be handed

over the possession of the land/ areas identified and declared as protected

forests and the Revenue Department was directed to update its records to

ensure that the government lands were shown as protected forests. In case

of private lands, the Revenue Department was directed to update its records

to ensure that the private lands were shown as forests.


12/91



The order also inter alia, directed that :

(i) there shall be a total freeze on the destruction and cutting of mangroves in

the entire State of Maharashtra;

(ii) All construction and rubble/ garbage dumping on the mangrove areas shall

be stopped forthwith;

(iii) Regardless of ownership all construction taking place within 50 metres on all

sides of all mangroves shall be forthwith stopped;

(iv) No development permission whatsoever shall be issued by any authority in

the State in respect of any area under mangroves;

(v) The Municipal Commissioner of Greater Mumbai shall forthwith issue

necessary directions to the MCGM Building Proposals department not to

entertain any applications for development (as defined in the MRTP Act,

1966) in respect of mangrove lands regardless of nature of ownership;

(iii) Bombay High Court Order dated 24 January 2007 in Notice of Motion

663/2006 in PIL No.87/2006:

The Court accepted the recommendations of the expert body for widening the

Mahul creek better flow of rain water and permitted modification of the Order

dated 6 October 2005 on the condition that the Bombay Municipal

Corporation (BMC), shall ensure that the mangroves were removed only

where such removal was necessary.

(iv) Bombay High Court Order dated 28 July 2008 in Notice of Motion Nos.538/ 2006 and 245/ 2006 in PIL W.P No. 87/ 2007:

This order was passed pursuant to the cited Notice taken out by CIDCO and

the Central Railway respectively for modifying the order dated 6 October

2005 on the ground that the projects mentioned in the Notice be exempted as

they fall in the categories mentioned in the order. By virtue of the said order

the Court observed the following:

(i) Category 1 projects: consisting of Infrastructure projects such as roads,

bridges, railways, culverts, pipe outlets water supply/ sewerage system

etc. which did not involve cutting of mangroves but which fell within 50mtrs from the mangroves. On the mutual agreement of both parties to

the petition, it was agreed that since the projects did not involve cutting

of mangroves and were required in larger public interest, all projects

situated on the landward side of the HTL may be allowed to be taken

up.

(ii) Category 3 projects: consisting of using land in CRZ- I as permitted

uses viz., as part of the Golf course project, without cutting mangroves.

(iii) Category 4 projects: consisting of cleaning and maintenance of artificial

channels and holding ponds developed as storm water drainage

systems, specifically holding ponds at Sanpada, Dronagiri, Kalamboli,


13/91



Panvel and Ulwe. On the mutual agreement of both parties to the

petition, it was agreed that maintenance works which are critical, in

these areas may be taken up as per technical requirements and in other

places the works would be taken up as per the suggestions of experts

including Bombay Environmental Action Group (BEAG).

(iv) Category 5 projects: consisting of Infrastructure projects involving the

cutting of mangroves. Specifically the construction of bridges along the

Palm Beach Marg extension of Ghansoli and the Railway embankment

project at Nerul were discussed.

The Court observed that it would take up other Notices of motion on a case to

case basis wherein there is no cutting of mangroves and the development is

on the landward side of the HTL but within 50 metres of the existing

mangroves.

The Court also clarified that CIDCO would have to obtain the required

environmental clearances, for implementation of all the (above) projects

undertaken by them. The order further required CIDCO to give an

undertaking that it would abide by the terms and conditions and stated that

other reliefs sought by CIDCO would be considered subsequently as and

when the contingency arose. Further more the CIDCO was directed toapproach the competent authority under the MoEF and the Authorities

constituted thereunder and seek necessary directions at different levels and

subsequently approach the High Court. The order stated that on obtaining

such clearances and sanctions, the Court would pass appropriate orders on a

case to case basis.

(v) Bombay High Court Order dated 8 October 2008 in Notice of Motion

Nos. 538/ 2006 and 245/ 2006 in PIL W.P No. 87/ 2007:

This order merely reiterated that both the cited Notice of Motion had beendisposed off by the Courts order dated 28 July 2008.

(vi) Bombay High Court Order dated 18 March 2009 in Notice of Motion Nos.

379/ 2007 and 260/2007 in PIL W.P No. 87/ 2006:

The BMC had moved this Notice to modify the Order dated 6October 2005 in

order to repair and maintain various public works primarily for sewerage

disposal. The BMC sought permission to cut and remove mangroves which

were obstructing their activities. The Honble High Court after taking into

consideration all the facts allowed the Notice on the grounds that the


14/91



activities sought to be executed by the BMC were essential services and

provision of basic civic amenities such as sewerage treatment and disposal.

The Honble High Court directed the BMC to make all necessary efforts to

restore the mangroves as far as possible during and after the completion of

the project so that there is minimal intervention in cutting and removing the

mangroves. The Honble High Court further directed afforestation of

mangroves in twice the area by applying the methodology of restitution at an

alternate site for all other purposes. The Court in the said order directed the

BMC to file an undertaking of the Municipal Commissioner in the matter of

compliance of an order of restoration before commencement of the project by

stating the time frame and identifying the alternate site for the said purpose.

Thus it is clear that the Honble Court permitted the BMC to undertake

construction of its sewerage disposal plant, which would entail destruction of

significant mangrove cover on the condition of restoring affected mangroves

and afforesting twice the affected area. The primary consideration that

weighed with the Court appeared to be the larger public interest being served

by such project.

(vii) Bombay High Court Order dated 29 April 2009 in Notice of Motion116/2009in PIL No. 87/ 2006.

This order was passed pursuant to CIDCOs application seeking the Courts

clarification that the order dated 6 October 2005 passed in the cited PIL did

not bar the MoEF from considering CIDCOs request for amending the CRZ

Notification, 1991 and thereafter amending the said Notification. The order

inter alia, clarified that the order dated 6 October 2005 did not seek to restrict/

restrain any authority from exercising its statutory powers in accordance with

law.In view of the above, the MoEF proceeded to amend the CRZ Notification

dated 19 February, 1991 vide its order dated 15 May, 2009.

3. In our view, the NMIA is a project that has significant public interest and is an

essential project for the development of the State, the Mumbai Metropolitan

Region, as well as India.. The development of the NMIA in a sustainable

manner will ease the burden on the existing infrastructure due to congestion

at the old airport and ensure economic prosperity of the region and its people,


15/91



which will in turn benefit the State and the country. This is apparent from the

bare fact that the GoI amended the CRZ Notification dated February 19, 1991

to specifically permit the construction of the NMIA. This is a clear indication of

the importance and significance of the said project. It is also clear that the

Honble High Court has in specific instances modified the impact of the Order

dated 6 October 2005 on the basis of the principle of sustainable

development to the extent as is required for carrying out activities which are

in the larger interests of the community or public. In this context, a review of

the various orders passed by the Bombay High Court in relation to mangrove

areas from time to time, indicate that the High Court tends to permit projects

that are required for larger public interest, subject to any measures that may

be required to be undertaken, such as prescription for minimal damage and

impact to ecologically sensitive areas such as mangroves and any conditions

that may be imposed with regard to compensatory afforestation etc. These

orders have been specifically restricted to their application with regard to

mangrove areas and would act as precedents in similar cases. The principles

established in these orders regarding public interest etc. would be followed by

the High Court in future cases too, such as in the case of the NMIA. In our

view, if the High Court is satisfied that all the required environmental studies

relating to preservation/ minimal destruction and compensatory afforestation

of mangroves have been satisfactorily conducted for the NMIA project and

the measures required to be taken are clearly etched out to minimize the

damage to the mangrove areas and that the MoEF has given its approval to

the same, the High Court ought to be inclined to approve such projects. In

the past too, the High Court has given its approval to various projects,

mentioned herein, where mangrove areas form part of a larger project having

significant public interest. It would appear that the NMIA project should also

qualify as a project of public interest and of significant public and economic

importance and hence an application for modification of the order dated 6

October 2005 for the NMIA project should reasonably be considered by the

High Court for approval.

4. In our view, an appropriate application ought to be filed before the Bombay

High Court setting out the importance of the NMIA project to the development


16/91



of Region, the economic and other benefits that will flow to the region and the

urgency in developing the project to take some of the load off from the

existing Mumbai airport. Other economic and public benefit arguments should

also be preferred. The application should seek approval to clear the site of

mangroves to undertake the development and construction of the project, by

setting out the methodology to be adopted by the Developer for

compensatory afforestation of the mangroves which will inevitably be

damaged due to the developmental activities, at the site and/or at alternate

sites.

5. To expedite the process, it would be desirable to first obtain the environment

and CRZ clearance of the MoEF, with minor changes in the approved CZMP

of Navi Mumbai region and thereafter, approach the Bombay High Court on

the limited issue of mangroves. The issue to be brought before the Bombay

High Court is only in relation to mangroves and nothing else. The order dated

29 April, 2009 of the Bombay High Court, discussed above, clearly provides

that the order dated 6 October, 2005 did not seek to restrict/ restrain any

authority from exercising its statutory powers in accordance with law. MoEF is

the only central authority having the powers to consider and decide on the

environmental feasibility of a project of this nature. Therefore, there is no

order of the Bombay High Court that prevents the MoEF from exercising its

statutory powers, which includes granting environmental approval for the

diversion of the said rivers, quarrying etc., except that to the extent that

mangroves are involved, the MoEF approval will be subject to the orders of

the Bombay High Court. MoEF should examine and look at the NMIA

proposal from a technical perspective viz., whether the project is

environmentally feasible; and thereafter give/ reject its approval. Therefore,

the MoEF has the authority to grant environmental and CRZ clearance to the

project, subject to the Bombay High Court approving the cutting and/or

rehabilitation and afforestation of the mangroves. While reviewing the impact

of any modification of their earlier order dated 6 October 2005, the Bombay

High Court would reasonably rely on the MoEF report/ approval for

understanding whether the project is likely to irreversibly affect mangrove

areas or not while deciding on whether to permit the project. Therefore it is


17/91



imperative that MoEF evaluate and decide on the Environmental Clearance

before CIDCO moves the High Court for permission to modify the order dated

6 October 2005 for the NMIA project.

6. Pursuant to the aforesaid approval of the MoEF, CIDCO may approach the

Bombay High Court and seek its permission to cut the mangroves at the site

and provide for compensatory afforestation at an alternate site in lieu thereof.

In considering such application, the Bombay High Court may have regard to

the approval granted by the MoEF and may grant its approval subject not only

to the recommendations and conditions that may be imposed by the MoEF

but also such other conditions that it may deem fit to impose.

7. To conclude, in our view, the orders of the Bombay High Court do not in any

manner prevent or restrict the statutory authority or functions of the MoEF

from considering and granting on terms it deems fit, the environmental and

CRZ clearance for the project. The limited restriction on the powers of the

MoEF is with regards to the mangroves in the State. Any project proponent

would require the further approval of the Bombay High Court in addition to the

approval of the MoEF, for handling mangroves. CIDCO may obtain this

approval subsequently. We are in the process of reviewing various other

orders passed by the Bombay High Court in this and other connected matters

and will provide you our analysis of the same at a later date.

D. Any other issues

1. One other issue that needs to be highlighted is the application of the AAI Act

to the development of the NMIA. The relevant issues are discussed below.

2. We understand that the Project is proposed to be developed on a PPP basis

and the concession for the operation and management of the NMIA would be

granted by the Government of Maharashtra to a private party. It is proposed

that the private party will hold 74% of the equity in the project company, thus

becoming a majority shareholder in the project company and the balance

equity will be held through CIDCO. It is also anticipated that AAI may also


18/91



eventually hold certain equity in the project, however, such equity will not

dilute the private sector shareholding.

3. The AAI Act inter alia, applies to- allairports whereat air transport services

are operated or are intended to be operated, other than airports and airfields

belonging to or subject to the control of any armed force of the Union4; all

private airports in so far as it relates to providing air traffic service5, to issue

directions under Section 37 to them and for the purposes of Chapter VA6

4. The terms Airport and Private Airport have been defined in Section 2 of the

AAI Act. Section 2(b) defines Airport as a landing and taking off area for

aircrafts, usually with runways and aircraft maintenance and passenger

facilities and includes aerodrome as defined in clause (2) of Section 2 of the

Aircraft Act, 19347. Further Section 2 (nn) of the AAI Act, defines a private

airport as a private airport means an airport owned, developed or managed

by - (i) any person or agency other than the Authority or any State

Government, or(ii) any person or agency jointly with the Authority or any State

Government or both where the share of such person or agency as the case

may be in the assets of the private airport is more than fifty per cent.

5. A reading of the said definitions clearly indicate that, since the majority

shareholding in the NMIA project company will be held by private parties,

NMIA will be a Private Airport as defined above.

6. Extent of the AAIs authority over Private Airports:

(i) The AAI Act provides for the functions of the Authority constituted under

the AAI Act (the Authority) which inter alia, include establishment of

airports, providing assistance in the establishment of private airports by

rendering such technical, financial or other assistance as the Central

Government may consider necessary for such purpose8.

4Section 1(3)(a) of the AAI Act

5As per Section 2 (d) of the AAI Act, includes flight information service, alerting service, air traffic advisory service, air traffic

control service, area control service, approach control service and airport control service.6

Section 1(3)(aa) of the AAI Act7

The definition of the term aerodrome is set out in clause 3.3.3 below8 Section 12(3)(aa)of the AAI Act.


19/91



(ii) Further in case of private airports engaged in the business of providing

air traffic service the Authority is authorized to issue directions under

Section 37.Subsection 1 of section 37 states that, The Authority or any

officer specially authorized by it in this behalf may, from time to time, by

order, issue directions, consistent with the provisions of the Aircraft Act,

1934, and the rules made there under, with respect to any of the

matters specified in clauses (f), (h),(i),(j),(k),(m),(p),(qq) and (r) sub-

section (2) of section 5 of that Act(i.e. the Aircraft Act), to any person or

persons engaged in aircraft operations or using any airport, heliport,

airstrip or civil enclave, in any case where the Authority or the officer is

satisfied that in the interests of the security of India or for securing the

security of the aircraft it is necessary to do so.

(iii) Thus it can be seen that the AAI can exert its authority over a private

airport providing air traffic service only to the limited extent provided in

the AAI Act. These limited functions and authority over the NMIA as a

private airport may be exercised by AAI under the provisions of the AAI

Act/Aircraft Act alone, and not in its capacity as a shareholder partner in

the project company.

(iv) Save as set out above, the management and operation of Private

Airports is governed as per the provisions of the Aircraft Act, 1934 and

the Aircraft Rules, 1937. Section 2 (2) of the said Act defines an

Aerodrome as, any definite or limited ground or water area intended

to be used, either wholly or in part, for the landing or departure of

aircraft, and includes all buildings, sheds, vessels, piers and other

structures thereon or appertaining thereto. These aerodromes are

required to obtain a license from the Directorate General of Civil

Aviation (DGCA), Ministry of Civil Aviation (MCA), Government of

India (GoI) prior to commencement of operations.9 Further the Central

Government has the power to make rules pertaining to inter alia, the

licensing, inspection and regulation of aerodromes, the conditions under

which aerodromes may be maintained, the prohibition or regulation of

the use of unlicensed aerodromes10. Thus, the NMIA would be

9Rule 78 of the Aircraft Rules.

10 Section 5 (2) (b) of the Act


20/91



governed by the provisions of the Aircrafts Act and Rules, with the AAI

having limited authority to issue directions with respect to circumstances

specified in the AAI Act, as set out above.

7. Do restrictions on construction and activities contained in the AAI Act

apply to Private Airports under the Aircraft Act, such as the NMIA?

(i) As discussed above, the NMIA will be a Private Airport as defined

under the AAI Act, and it will operate under a license from the DGCA

under the Aircraft Act. Consequently the restrictions on the development

of an airport as stipulated under the AAI Act would not apply to the

NMIA. It is clear from a reading of the above note that, the NMIA would

be governed primarily by the Aircraft Act, the conditions imposed in the

license issued by the DGCA and to a limited extent, by the Authority,

under the AAI Act.

(ii) We further find that the provisions of the Aircraft Act or Rules do not

provide for the activities that can be conducted or place any restrictions

on activities that can be conducted by a Developer within an

aerodrome. The provisions under the AAI Act that cover the AAIs

limited scope of authority over a private airport do not touch upon anydevelopmental restrictions of a private party within a private airport.

(iii) Therefore, in our view, there are no provisions under the AAI Act or the

Aircraft Act applicable to NMIA that restrict or prescribe the nature of

activities that can be undertaken by the Developer of the NMIA/CIDCO.

The NMIA will in respect of the development activities be subject to the

restrictions contained in the zoning and other rules, regulations and bye

laws of the local town planning authority, which in this case would be

the Navi Mumbai General Development Control Rules (Navi MumbaiGDCR) framed by the local town planning authority, i.e. CIDCO.

(iv) In our view, therefore, the Developer of the NMIA can plan, design and

develop the NMIA in any manner that it deems necessary and may build

offices, housing and other economic projects to support the airport as

per its plans, subject to the Navi Mumbai GDCR. (Unquote)

In view of the above, the various activities, such as, mangrove

cutting/destruction, diversion and training of rivers, quarrying and cutting

of mountain and earth, reclamation, alteration in tidal pattern, are


21/91



permissible in CRZ area based on CRZ Regulation, 1991 Notification as

amended upto 15th May, 2009. However, it is mandatory to approach

the Hon. Bombay High Court for obtaining Leave of the Court before

implementing the Navi Mumbai International Airport project in the

mangrove area after obtaining the environment clearance from the

competent authority i.e. Ministry of Environment & Forest.

8.2 Recoursing Channel.

A study was carried out in accordance with the TOR specified by MoEF on the

recoursing of the ulwe creek , cost implication for providing engineering solutions

and design changes in order to avoid change in the in creek. The following

paragraphs narrates the details of the studies carried out.

8.2.1 Background

The Navi Mumbai International Airport has been planned with two

independent parallel runways placed at 1.55 km. apart with a design capacity

of 60 MPPA. With the above configuration of runways, an area of about 1300

Ha consisting of 1160 Ha for aeronautical use and rest for off-site physical

infrastructure, is required for airport zone for the efficient functioning of

airport.

Ulwe creek is flowing through the airport zone. It runs from South to North

passing through almost the middle of the airport crossing both the runways

and finally meet to Panvel Creek. The total area covered under these rivers is

about 245 Ha.To make the land available for airport zone admeasuring about

1300 Ha., the option available is to retain the rivers as it is and to built the

airport over this or recourse Ulwe creek suitably.

8.2.2 Need for Recoursing of Ulwe Creek.

The first option of retaining the Ulwe creek, as it is, is examined taking into

consideration the various factors, such as; the construction of airport on stilt,

runway orientation, security, operation & maintenance, environment and cost

implication are described below:

i) Airport on Stilt: The development of airport partly on stilt and partly on

firm ground to the extent required have not been experimented in

anywhere in the world, because of its unique behavior and problems


22/91



associated with it, which would be difficult to simulate to work out an

engineering solution. The 245 Ha.area is required to be built on the

pillars numbering about 6000 going up to the rock strata and coming at

a level where the creek can be desilted and maintained using

mechanical means. On this area, no structures above will be allowed,

otherwise this will increase the airport development level further to suit

the structural requirement of activities coming over this. As such the

airport loose the utilization 20 percent it valuable land working area

affecting severely capacity of airport.

ii) Runway orientation: Based on air traffic forecast, designed capacity of

airport is 60 million passenger per annum for which two independent

runways with 1.55 km spacing between the runway is required.

Assuming that Ulwe creek will be allowed to cut across the airport by

constructing bridges at many locations, would make airport constantly

subjected to security threat as well as loss of full utilization air side area

thereby loss of airport capacity. Possibility of changing the runway

position towards South is also examined and the same was ruled out

because of non-availability of space and presence of road, railway and

Karnala hill.

iii) Security: The large area below stilt admeasuring about 245 ha needs

to be secured from all sides on 24X7 basis which is costly and

impossible task owing poor accessibility and it will adversely affect

financial health of the airport. The security requirement prescribed by

Bureau of Civil Aviation Security, Ministry of Civil Aviation prevents such

type airport development.

iv) Operation & Maintenance: Ulwe Creek will required to be desilted at

regular interval owing to obstruction created in terms of large no pillars

to maintained its discharging capacity. Maintaining creek below stills

will require special technique and skills associated with permanent and

recurring cost implication on the airport operation. Similarly the

maintenance of stilt structures will add a constant problem owing to the

saline environment.

v) Environment: Development of part of the Airport on stilt requiring large

number of pillar foundations would defeat the very purpose of retaining


23/91



the geomorphology of creek. There is an equal chance of alteration in

the hydraulic regime of the creek. More over it will prevent growth of

mangroves, vegetation and may affect adversely the aquatic life

because of absence of sunlight and proper ventilation.

vi) Cost implication: The construction of part of the airport on the stilt will

be a task by itself. A rough estimate based on the number of pillars,

beams/girders, deck slab at the rate of Rs.70,000/Sqmt for 245 Ha. of

airport area works out to Rs.16,000 Cr. Besides this there will be

recurring expenditure at the rate of 2% per annum would be Rs.336 Cr.

This cost once included in the project cost would make the airport

project totally unviable.

Based on the above parameters, the development of airport without

recoursing of the Ulwe is ruled out and the option available is to make

available the airport land by recousing the Ulwe creek on the Southern

boundary of the airport. The study on recoursing Ulwe creek is

described below:

8.2.3 Proposed Recoursing Of Uwle Creek

The techno-economic feasibility study of recoursing of Ulwe creek was

carried out in 2000-01 by conducting 1D mathematical model study by

CWPRS, Pune and the study concluded that the proposed airport

development does not cause any rise in the flood level estimated with

CIDCOs airport development - by recoursing Ulve river at the mouth of

Thane creek.

Upon In principle approval of Navi Mumbai International Airport project by

the Govt. of India, the CWPRS has conducted 1D mathematical model study

for the entire stream of Panvel Creek to predict the flow conditions in Panvel

Creek with the development of airport considering Probable Maximum Flood

(PMF) resulting from PMP and 100 years return period flood and spring/neap

tide as boundary condition. A detailed 2D mathematical model study was

also carried out by CWPRS to predict the condition of flood in Panvel creek

on upstream and down stream and around proposed NMIA for the same.

A vast amount of data consisting of 50 years of hydrological data,

topographical survey of rivers from high tide mark upto 12 kms. upstream,


24/91



bathmetric survey of Panvel and part of Thane creek and tidal and velocity

observed for one month. The above study concluded that the airport

development does not increase the flood level in the streams. The study was

also reviewed by the Expert Reviewer from DHI, who in turn concluded that

the study carried out by CWPRS is thorough and in a competent manner.

Based on the maximum predicted water surface level along the airport

boundary for PMP of 6 hours storm with peak of hydrograph at spring tide

high water level and 120 mts. wide channel for Ulve river, the safe grade

elevatorn of proposed airport has been worked out which varies from 8 mts.

towards East to 7 mts. towards the West from the centre of airport area. The

above safe grade elevation of proposed airport has been arrived after

considering the provision of free board of 2 mts. and 0.5 mts. for sea rise

level due to climate change.

The recoursing of Ulwe creek will commence from the downstream of the

bridge located on the SH54 with a curve of 250 mts. for smooth flow. The

commencement of both the banks will start just downstream of the SH54

bridge with a trapezoidal section. Both the banks will have side slope of

1:2.5 to 1:3 with stabilizing berm of 5 mts. width in between. The Invert level

of SH54 bridge and 60 mts. bridge on Aamra Marg was kept unaltered

resulting in the bed slope of Ulve river in 1:10,295. The total length of this

diversion is about 3.2 kms. of which 1.5 kms. is in rock in which both the

banks will be vertical. The width of the channel has been kept as 120 mts.

through out..Based on the current rate, the cost of recoursing of Ulwe river

works out Rs.92 Cr..The details of the recoursing of Ulwe River is given in

Figures 8.1, and 8.2.


25/91



Fig: 8.1Details of Recourse Channel


26/91



Fig: 8.2Cross Sections for Proposed Recourse Channel

Thus, the recoursing of Ulwe river for the development of airport is cost

effective, environment friendly, hydraulically efficient and easy for

construction, maintenance and operation point of view and, therefore,

adopted for implementation.


27/91


28/91



hills. The vicinity of airport site is surrounded by a series of North-South

hill ranges such as Matheran Hill Range, Panvel-Mumbra Hill Range,

Karnala Hill Range etc. The Matheran hill falls in the approach surface

area of Navi Mumbai Airport and meets the criteria of ' Precipitous

terrain' requiring special consideration in planning of instrumental

approach.

With the 90-270 runway orientation one of the hills of Matheran need

to be shaved by about 40m to meet the criteria of instrumental approach

as well as the ICAO s prescribed glide slope of 2.75 3.0 To

avoid shaving of hills in the eco-sensitive area as well as to meet the

crieteria of glide slope, the above runway orientation to be further fine

tuned to the runway orientation to 83- 263.

iii) Spacing between Runways:

Based on air traffic forecast reports, the MMR air travel demand is

estimated to the tune of 119 MPPA by 2030-31 and after allocating the

40 MPPA to existing Mumbai airport, the Navi Mumbai International

airport must be designed for more than 60 MPPA. With the projected air

traffic demand of 60 MPPA, minimum two parallel runways are required

and that too with independent operations. The runway length require for

large aircraft at the elevation of airport site at Navi Mumbai, works out to


29/91



3700m and accordingly the length of airport taking into consideration for

airport lighting stop, stop and clear area results in about 6Km.

As per ICAO norms, simultaneous instrument operations on parallel

runways for independent parallel approach requires a distance more

than 1525 m between the centre line of two runways. Distance less than

this would make the operation of runways dependent thereby reducing

the capacity of the airport less than the designed capacity of 60 MPPA..

iv) Compatibility with Mumbai Airport

Mumbai airport has two runways, the main runway oriented along 09-27

(91-271 with reference to North) and an intersecting runway oriented

at 14-32 used only 10% of time. Since NMIA is very close to Mumbai

airport, it is very crucial that the runway orientation of the new airport

should not hamper the operations at both the airports. Providing parallel

runways with similar orientation in both airports will ensure efficient use

of airspace and safe operations with minimum conflict between the two

airports.

In order to assess the safe and independent inter operability of both the

airport, a simulation study with the Mumbai & Navi Mumabi runway

orientation was carried out through ICAO at NAV Canada. This study

concluded that with appropriate procedure in place the simultaneous

operation of both Mumbai & Navi Mumbai aiport is feasible.

8.3.3. NMIA Runway Orientation:

Keeping the above criterias in view as well as the projected travel demand

of 60 mppa, the runway orientation works out to 83-263 with a spacing of 1.

55 km. with mid terminal. With the required length of airport 6Km, the width

of about 3 Km and area required for additional supporting activity incidental to

airport the boundary of airport is delineated. The figure below shows the

runway orientation of Navi Mumbai International Airport.


30/91



The above runway orientation worked out with the usability factor of 99.99%,

cross wind component of 20 Knots compatibility with the main runway of

Mumbai Airport, the glide slope of 3

and no shaving of hills in eco-sensitive

area of Matheran.

The airport area so worked out doesnt leave any scope for further

modification in airport boundary owing to presence of Panvel & Taloja creek

in the North, National Highway 4B, Gadhi river & Panvel township in the East,

SH41 Panvel-Uran railwayline, NH4-B & Karnala hill in the South and Amra

Marg with Thane creek in the west.

8.3.4 Presence of Mangroves in Airport areaThe runway orientation so work out with airport boundary is overlapped on

airport area showing the presence of mangrove and the findings are

That the mangroves along Ulwe river, which crosses through the centre line

of both the runways and in the mid of airport where the various airside

activities will be located for operation of airport, thereby the saving of

mangroves is not feasible.


31/91



Similarly, the second runway falls on the mangroves along the Gadhi River

bank and on the periphery of Vagivili Island and saving of these mangroves is

not feasible also.

An exercise was carried out by reducing the runway spacing to 1.6Km as well

as reorienting the runways within the extent of +/-10 and then overlapping

the airport boundary on the map of mangroves and same is described in

following para.

8.3.5 Reducing runway spacing

An exercise was carried out by reducing the runway spacing to minimum

1.55 km to accommodate the mid terminal between the runways as well as

meeting the 1525m spacing criteria of ICAO. The map indicating the runway

and mangroves is shown below.


32/91



This alternative also doesnt save the mangroves since both the runways

cross the mangroves along Ulwe River and the 2nd runway passes through

the mangroves along the Gadhi River & Vaghvli Island.

8.3.6 Reorienting the runways:

The runway orientation of 83-263 is reoriented to 93-273 keeping the

limitation of extent of + or 10 and accordingly the following scenario

emerges.


33/91



This orientation is not feasible due to presence of high rise buildings and hill

ranges in close proximity of runways warranting the shaving of hill in

Matheran eco-sensitive area, which falls in approach surface of airport. Also,in this case the mangroves cannot be saved since both the runways are

passing through the mangroves along Ulwe as well as Gadhi river.

Thus the above exercises bring out the fact that the reorientation of runway

and decreasing the distance between the runways to the minimum of 1.55 km

there is no saving of mangroves.

Thus the runway orientation of 83-263 with a spacing of 1. 55 km worked

out based on the determining criteria and has to be adopted with the

plantation of mangroves.

8.4 Ground Water Study

The terms of reference for carrying out EIA study given by the Ministry of

Environment & Forest has suggested to carry out a scientific study to explain

the quality and quantity of ground water in the impact zone, due to proposed

training and diversion of Gadhi & Ulwe rivers respectively.


34/91



The Hydrogeological Study in the Impact Zone for Navi Mumbai International

Airport groundwater study was carried out by Groundwater Survey and

Development Agency, (GSDA) Water Supply & Sanitation Department, Govt.

of Maharashtra. The original report of above study is enclosed in

ANNEXURE-IV. This study reveals the following:

i) Diversion of Ulve River This River forms the main drainage of

mini watershed WF40/7. The water holding capacity of the aquifer in

the mini watershed is limited, hence the dugwells yield less, due to

which there are no agricultural activities in Rabi Season. Few

farmers cultivate vegetables. Diversion of Ulve River near the creek

will not have any adverse effect on groundwater in this mini

watershed. The runoff in the Ulve River can be reduced by

construction of few Water Conservation Structures from Village

Garade to Village Bhangarpada.

ii) The hydrogeological study observed that there is no effect on ground

water regime. Also the drainage is not controlled by structures. The

water level in the whole area behave in a normal way and no evidence

are observed that there is a control of any structure.

iii) The 49 water quality network stations indicates that the water quality

of Panvel City, Taloja and Ulve have very high TDS ranging from 2000

ppm to 14,000 ppm. High concentration of Chloride is found near

Turbhe, Kamothe and Kharghar area. The unconfined aquifers are

yielding sweet water, but in some cases the deeper confined aquifers

are polluted, due to sea water intrusion and industrial waste from the

Industrial area.

iv) The ground water level observed in observation wells indicates that

there is a rising trend which shows that the optimal uses of water for

agriculture is not done. The stage of development indicates that there

is a further scope of ground water uses. Due to urbanization, drinking

water is supplied through pipe water scheme. Hence, the dependency

on ground water is reduced.


35/91



8.5 Vaghvli Island & Coastal line Study:


Environment & Forest has suggested to carry the study to know whether the

island has merged with the land area due to sedimentation as compared to

position in 2003 as well as examine the details of erosion of soil/coastal line

in last 50 years. The following paragraph narrates the details of study and its

findings.

Vaghvli Island is located at the mouth of Panvel creek & on the estuary of five

westerly flowing rivers from Shyadhri. Taloja & Kasadi rivers come from the

North, Kalundri & Gadhi river from the East & Ulwe river in the South. It is the

meeting point of Panvel creek from the East, and the rivers from the other

directions giving rise to the island owing to hydrological behavior of streams.

The area of island is about 2.80 SqKm and majority of the area is low lying

which gets inundated during high tide. A small settlement exists on the island

where the level is above +3m. Taloja & Gadhi river confluence is located in

the North-East corner where as the Ulwe river flows South of Vaghvli island

with a link to Gadhi river. The island being very ancient, an exercise is

carried out to understand the change in shape, if any, as well as its coastal

line surrounding it, in the last 40 years, based on the available data.

8.5.1 Methodology;

To examine the shape and the surrounding coastal lines the Survey of India

(SoI) map 1970 was used on which the shape of island as well as coastal

lines around it were digitized. The approximate area of island works to

280.85 Ha and the area of creeklet located South of island linking the Gadhi

creeklet is about 10.30 Ha.


36/91



Fig.No.8.3

Digitized shape of Vaghvli island & the coastal lines imagery

T

h

e

digitized lines are geo-referenced to the available satellite imagery of 1992,

1995, 2001, 2006 & 2009. The findings of the exercise is given below-

i) Imagery 1992

The line showing the shape of lsland and its surrounding coastal lines

were geo-referenced on the LAND SAT imagery (1992) of NRSA having

resolution of 25m. The line showing the shape of the island of 1970

overlaps on this imagery more precisely on the South-East & South-

west direction whereas the shape of the island has undergone slight

modification in Northern & western side.


37/91



Fig.No.8.4Digitized shape of Vaghvli island & the coastal lines imagery 1992.

The reason could be that the reclamation work carried out by CIDCO in

Northern side in early 1980 influenced the flow condition in the regime

of Gadhi river. This observation is further reinforced by reduction of

area of Vghivali island to 268.65Ha from 280.85Ha. Further, the

creeklet shows increase in area from 10.30 Ha to 12.26 Ha.

ii) Imagery 1995

Similar exercise was carried out by geo-referencing the line showing the

shape of lsland and its surrounding coastal lines on the LAND SAT

imagery (1995) of NRSA having resolution of 25m. The line showing

the shape of the island of 1970 overlaps on this imagery more precisely

on the Eastern side & South-west direction, whereas the shape of the

island has undergone slight modification on South- Eastern side.


38/91



Fig.No.8.5Digitized shape of Vaghvli island & the coastal lines imagery 1995.

T

h

e

shape of island and its coastal line has remained more or less same.

The area of island is about 268.40Ha and the creeklet is 11.65 Ha,which is marginal change as compared to findings from Imagery of

1992.

iii) Imagery 2001

Similar exercise was carried out by geo-referencing the line showing the

shape of lsland and its surrounding coastal lines on the Ikonos imagery

of resolution of 1m. The line showing the shape of the island of 1970

overlaps on this imagery more precisely on the Eastern side & South-

west direction, whereas the shape of the island has undergone slightmodification on the confluence Taloja& Gadhi rivers in the form of

widening of mouth of Gadhi river.


39/91



Fig.No.8.6Digitized shape of Vaghvli island & the coastal lines on Ikonos imagery 2001.

The reason for widening of the mouth of Gadhi river, could the

construction of bridge over creeklet connecting Gadhi river & Ulwe river,resulting in reduction in discharge from the creeklet. The shape of island

and its coastal line has remained more or less same. The area of island

is about 266.57Ha and the creeklet is 11.93 Ha, which is marginal

variation as compared to earlier image of 1995.

iv) Imagery 2006

The exercise was reapeated by geo-referencing the line showing the

shape of lsland and its surrounding coastal lines on the quickbird

imagery(2006) of resolution of 0.6m. The line showing the shape of the

island of 1970 overlaps on this imagery more precisely on the Eastern

side & South-west direction, whereas the shape of the island has

undergone further slight modification on the confluence of Taloja&

Gadhi rivers in the form of widening of mouth of Gadhi river. Further, the

marginal modification is also observed on the creeklet joinging the

Gadhi river. The imagery also shows the reduction in depth of water in

this creeklet owing to probable siltation.


40/91



Fig.No.8.7Digitized shape of Vaghvli island & the coastal lines on imagery 2006.

The reason for widening of the mouth of Gadhi river, could the

construction of bridge over creeklet connecting Gadhi river & Ulwe river,

resulting in reduction in discharge from the creeklet. The shape of island

and its coastal line has remained more or less same. The area of island

is about 269.48Ha and the creeklet is 10.34 Ha, which is marginal.

v) Imagery 2009

The exercise was repeated by geo-referencing the line showing the

shape of lsland and its surrounding coastal lines on the Google imagery

of resolution of 1m. The line showing the shape of the island of 1970overlaps on this imagery more precisely on the Eastern side & South-

west direction, whereas the shape of the island has undergone slight

modification on the confluence of Taloja& Gadhi rivers.


41/91



Fig.No.8.8Digitized shape of Vaghvli island & the coastal lines on imagery 2009.

.

T

h

e

shape of island and its coastal lines has remained more or less samewhen compared to imagery 2006. The area of island is about 273.17Ha

and the creeklet is 11.61 Ha, which is marginally more when compared

with imagery 2006 .

Keeping in view the limitation of this exercise, broadly it can be

concluded that the shape of Vaghvli island and its surrounding coastal

lines remained more or less same in last 40 years. There is no major

evidence of erosion in the coastal lines in and around the Vaghvli

island and in five rivers joining to it. Further, the Vaghvli island is notmerging with the main land although there is reduction in discharge

from the creeklet owing to probably construction of bridge, resulting in

siltation which gets flushed out during the monsoon. The above

findings are equally matches with our day-to-day ground observations

while working on Navi Mumbai projects.


42/91



8.6 Mathematical & Physical Model Study


Environment & Forest has specified to carry the mathematical and physical

model study by CWPRS to assess the impact of activities relating to project

on hydrodynamics/flow in the river/backwater/creeks. Further, the

examination in detail for the probability of flooding of agricultural land,

residential area and other area due to proposed development/construction of

the airport is also to be studied considering unprecedented rainfall event of

26th July 2005.

CWPRS had carried out the 1D mathematical model study during the Tehno-

economic Feasibility Study during 2001 and concluded that the airport

development will not cause any additional rise in flood level in Panvel Creek

with the rest of CIDCO development.

CWPRS was entrusted to carry out the 1D & 2D Mathematical model study

with the fresh data for the entire Panvel Creek from the mouth of Panvel

Thane Creek upto 12 kms. upstream from the reach of high tide of five (5)

Rivers. The above study has been completed and the major findings are as

follows:

These 1-D and 2-D studies have shown that the flood levels in these river

channels except Ulwe and in the Panvel creek channel along north boundary

of airport area were more or less unaffected. In the Panvel creek reach

between Gadhi-Taloja confluence to Belapur-Ulwe bridge, a marginal rise in

the flood levels of about 0.15 to 0.20 m was predicted for a very short

duration at the time of high water. For remaining period, the water levels were

more or less same or even slightly lower as a result of channelization of flow,

reduced tidal prism and diversion of Ulwe River. Along Ulwe river, due to

diversion of river the rise in water level at location of diversion (Panvel - Ulwe

road bridge on SH54) will be about 1.6 m for 6 hour duration PMP rainfall

and 120 m wide Ulwe diversion channel.

The original report of above study is enclosed in ANNEXURE-V. The

CWPRS was also entrusted the work of carrying out the physical model

study by extending the existing Mumbai Port Model (scale of 1:400 H and

1/80 V) for accommodating the Panvel Creek. The laying of the physical

model has been completed and the calibration of the model is in the


43/91



progress. The study of diversion of Gadhi & Ulwe river will be carried out

from hydraulic point of view after the calibration of the model.

The CWPRS Report on 1D & 2D model study was reviewed by DHI

Consultant, Netherland. The process of review was interaction with the

officials of CIDCO, CWPRS and CIDCOs Hydraulic Advisor Mr.J.S.

Tarapore followed by site visit. The consultant also visited the CWPRS and

reviewed the work of 1D and 2D model and thereafter submitted the Review

Report. The DHI Consultant is of the opinion that the study carried out by

CWPRS is thorough and in competent manner. The Review Report is

enclosed at Annexue-V.

8.7 Mangrove Analysis, Plantation & Management Study:


Environment & Forest has specified to examine and submit the details of

mangrove area, destruction of mangroves and management measures in

detail with the help of satellite imagery of the last 15 years. The following

paragraph describes the field observation, analysis and location of mangrove

likely to be destroyed due to project, compensatory plantation and its

management.

8.7.1 Field Observation:

The field observation indicate that there are only degrading mangrove strands

predominantly between the two Rivers and to the NE side of the site. The

mangroves are dominated by Avicennia marina which in most of the places,

appears stunted, growing barely above 1 to 1.5m tall and with a perimeter of

canopy barely 1.5 m. There are sparse Bruguira cylindrical syn. Bruguira

caryophylloides and Aegiceros corniculata plants noticeable particularly

towards the hillside of Ulwe River. Along the banks of Ulwe River there is a

somewhat continuous and healthier growth ofAvicennia marina with patches

of Salvadora persica . At several places, the plants seem to be dying and

dried stems are left behind. Wherever there has been considerable

degradation of the true mangroves, the associate mangroves, mainly

Acanthus ilicifoiius has come up. So as to compete with the receding A.


44/91



marina plants, the stem of these A. ilicifolius plant has grown very tall with

leaves along the tip.

At places Acanthus longifolia is also seen growing among the A. marina.

Along the banks of Ulwe River facing North, towards Gadhi River the A

.marina plants are seen associated with healthy Sessmium portulacatum

plants. The channels that extend out from Ulwe River and Gadhi River where

the circulation of sea water is properly maintained, the mangroves are seen to

form healthy thickets though elsewhere there is only a sparse growth of

stunted plants . At a few places in NE region, where the tidal water seems to

spread, there are clumps of Clerodendrom inermis, with fewer and smaller

leaves as well as weak stem. Surprisingly, Salvadora persica plants are

sparse except for some locations. In contrast with the whitish and olive green

colour of A. marina, the clumps of S. persica are seen with parrot green,

smooth, almost glistening leaves. Salt tolerant grasses like Settaria sp., Coix

lachryma-joba, Scirpus maritimus, Eleucine sp. are found to associate with

the mangroves and mangrove associates. Away from the waterfront, these

grasses that dominate the landscape replace the mangroves. Though in the

summer season, when the current survey was done, the grasses were found

to have dried at places where the moisture was retained to sufficient extent,

these grasses were found lush green and fresh . Monsoon is the flowering

season of Avicennia marinaand subsequently the fruits drop from the parent

plants. They start germinating soon as the pericarp disintegrates. The

germinating seeds could be seen in large numbers at several locations along

the site. Despite this, the saplings ofAvicennia apparently fail to survive so

that the young plants were hardly seen. The frequency of mangroves

remained same at all collection sites.

In post-monsoon season, the saplings ofAvicennia marina that had come up

at a few places had already dried and even the Acanthus longifolia had

started drying . The stands were appearing just as they were in pre-monsoon

at most places. Salvadora persica was seen flowering.

8.7.2 Density and Dispersal

Dispersion of plant species in a community (frequency) their numerical

strength (density), and dominance can be studied, following the methods

given by Misra (1968) and Pandeya et al. (1968).Two hundred quadrats of


45/91



size (5m x5 m

CHAPTER 8 ADDITIONAL STUDIES

Documents

Transcript of CHAPTER 8 ADDITIONAL STUDIES