KARACHI: “So many buildings have come up in the jurisdiction of the Malir Cantonment Board (MCB) over the past few years without being subjected to the legal process of environmental impact assessment (EIA). The Defence Housing Authority (DHA) has also built Phase VIII without an EIA. Is there no [environmental] law [in the province]?’

These observations were made by Director General of Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (Sepa) Naeem Mughal while wrapping up a public hearing organised on Tuesday in the Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FPCCI) office.

The hearing pertained to the EIA report of a mixed-used housing scheme consisting of seven residential towers and one commercial building, which has been proposed at Plot No. 350, Deh Safoora, in the jurisdiction of MCB.

Mr Mughal was replying to participants’ queries raised over the construction of several buildings within the jurisdiction of MCB, apparently without an EIA, a mandatory requirement under the law for projects falling in the category of Schedule II of Sepa rules and regulations.

“In 2017, the department wrote detailed letters to all land-owning organisations, including the DHA and cantonment boards, to share their master plans and ensure compliance with the environmental law. But, we didn’t receive any reply neither from the DHA nor the cantonment boards,” he said.

The exercise was repeated this year. The DHA was asked to urgently submit an EIA and a traffic management plan for all commercialised roads in its jurisdiction, including the EIA report of DHA Phase VIII (as well as the projects under the DHA Water Front Development Scheme).

‘We are not against development’

“There is no response yet to the March letter of Sepa. We are not against development but it must be within the law. It’s important for city’s sustainability,” Sepa’s top official complained, while regretting that the DHA and cantonment boards’ officials also didn’t turn up at public hearings pertaining to areas in their jurisdictions despite invitation.

Earlier, the programme started with a presentation on the project titled Credible Towers proposed over 19,360 square yards and the audience was informed that the project site was a commercial plot.

Highlighting some key features of the project, Saquib Ejaz Hussain representing the Environmental Management Consultants-Pakistan, which has prepared the project’s EIA report, said the proposed project was a self-contained building with sufficient parking space and systems for back-up power generation, sewage treatment and firefighting and that all necessary no-objection certificates (NOCs) had been obtained including those for utilities.

He, however, admitted that the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board (KWSB) was non-committal on water supply and linked it to the completion of K-IV project.

“The water supply would be supplemented by grey water recycling and hyper filtration system. The project after completion would require 103,525 gallons per day of potable water and 3.56MW of electricity,” he explained.

The issue of infrastructural developments in the city amid acute water and electricity shortages was also raised during the question hour.

“These NOCs [attached with the EIA report] are meaningless as nothing has been committed [by utility services in black and white],” said Dr Raza Gardezi of Citizens for Environment.

Plot status

He also questioned why no document had been attached with the EIA report to authenticate the official status of the plot, originally an agricultural land, which apparently was later converted into a different land use category.

Dr Gardezi also called upon Sepa to constrain the Sindh Building Control Authority and cantonment boards to undertake cumulative impact assessment of the corridors that had been commercialised before further grant of approval of architectural plans for buildings on the corridors concerned.

He also shared that only a building with 110-foot height could be built on the project site (opposed to the proposed ground plus-15 structure) as the site fell within the transition zone of the runaway under the Civil Aviation Authority rules.

Concerns related to traffic congestion were also highlighted and it was pointed out that the roads in the project area were not vehicle-worthy and were highly congested at peak hours.

There were also suggestions that the project should have a separate water storage tank to meet water requirements for firefighting and that Sepa should restrict the project proponent to provide accident and life insurance cover to labourers during the construction phase.

The fact that the project was huge in terms of its carbon footprint but the EIA report didn’t carry details of the plantation to be done in and around the project site also attracted criticism.

Replying to some of these concerns, it was explained by the project proponent that all NOCs granted by any utility agencies had a particular format in which clear commitments were largely avoided.

“If the CAA didn’t give clearance for extra parking space, the basement would be used for this purpose,” said EMC rep Hussain.

Published in Dawn, October 30th, 2019