Tholkappia Poonga Project Group 6

“A unique eco-restoration project carried out in the heart of Chennai”

  Unique ecology of flora and fauna  River sand quarrying

 Illegal encroachment  The number of

 Raja Gramin Thottam slum in Creek species of birds and
 Srinivasapuram Fisherman settlement aquatic life inhabiting
in Estuary Adyar this area rapidly
River declined
 Dump yard of untreated
Sewage & Construction debris

“From being a source of drinking water, the River degraded to a little more than a sewer drain”
Timeline of the Project
 Early attempts at development
1985  A Port Trust Management Training Institute was proposed to be located in in the Adyar estuary
region. However, it was later shifted down south away.
 World Wildlife Fund (WWF)-India Tamil Nadu Office submits proposal to the Government
seeking “protected area” status to declare Adyar Creek and Estuary area as a Bird Sanctuary.

 Notification issued to protect migratory birds and remaining mangroves, however the banks of the
river, estuary and river mouth were still under the possession of PWD TN.

 Ambedkar Manimandapam
1992  Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Memorial proposed by GoTN in an 5 acre area in Adyar Creek.

1993  Public Interest Litigation by NGO’s Civic Action Group (CAG), EXNORA in
Madras High Court.
 “Wooded area” proposal to develop 21.39 acres of urban forest in creek area by
Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA).
 Timeline of the Project
 Madras High Court directed to Government of Tamil Nadu to reduce the area of the memorial to 1.5
acres and restore the area.

 Further Degradation
1997  Signature “Save Adyar Creek” campaign by CAG against new constructions in the creek area.

1998  Madras High Court order to Tamil Nadu State Department of Environment to consider declaring
estuary and creek as a national park

 Conceptualizing an Eco-Park at the Adyar Creek

2003  Government hands over 58 acres of creek for restoration to the Corporation of Chennai(CoC) in the
intent to develop an “Eco Park”.
2004  Tamil Nadu Road Development Corporation (TNRDC) roped in as management
consultants of the projects. Adyar Creek Eco-Park Trust was formed.
 TNRDC approaches Pitchandikulam Forest Consultants(PFC) for advisory services.
 Timeline of the Project
 A hiccup!
2004  Tsunami in Chennai. Srinivasapuram near Adyar estuary one of the worst affected areas.
2005  TN state elections in 2005. Project put on hold due to elections.

 The Plunge!
2006  Pitchandikulam Forrest Consultants present to the new government. GoTN takes up the
project on a priority basis.
 Project implementation was handed over to Tamil Nadu Urban Infrastructure
Finance Services Limited (TNUIFSL) under Tamil Nadu Urban Development Fund.
 Adyar Poonga Trust formed : Board Members from CoC, CMDA, CMWSSB.

2007  PFC appointed consultants on the project spanning 58 acres.

 Raja Gramani Thottam slums evacuated by TNSCB and PWD.
Timeline of the Project
 Government promises no permanent constructions to Madras High Court. Counter affidavits by CAG,
EXNORA challenging the restoration plan. Govt. assures phase wise restoration of Total 358 acres.

 Master Plan & Implementation

 Foundation stone laid by the then chief minister of Tamil Nadu, Dr. Karunanidhi.

 Friends of Adyar Poonga (FAP) formed by Trust and PFC for creating awareness.
2008  Madras High Court allows the Adyar Poonga Trust to go ahead; Monitoring Committee formed to
overlook to the project.

2010  Adyar Poonga renamed after Tamil poet Tholkappia.

 Adyar Poonga Trust renamed as Chennai River Restoration Trust. Idea of restoring
the entire 300 acres Adyar Estuary area as part of phase-II proposed.
2011  Project obtains Coastal Regulatory Zone (CRZ) clearance from MoEF.

 Tholkappia Poonga inaugurated by the chief minister of Tamil Nadu.

 150,000 tons of debris was removed

B P
H A
E
A F
F
S T
O
E
37,600 reeds were planted
E
R
R
E
1
Challenges in Phase II
 Phase 2 involves the restoration of a more environmentally sensitive and complicated Adyar Estuary.

 Involves dealing with encroachments from the more politically sensitive and Tsunami affected
Srinivasapuram area.
 Some environmentalists claimed that Phase I was only a “beatification” project and not a “restoration” project.

 A public consultation meeting organized for Phase II had to be stopped mid-way amidst protests from NGOs
about the lack of public participation.

Lessons from Phase I

 What had TNUIFSL learnt from Phase I on managing stakeholders? What strategies could be repeated?

 What were the failures and what were some new approaches that could be tried to overcome stakeholder
concerns and arrive at a win-win solution?

 These were the key questions that Ms. Sharma the head of TNUIFSL, had to answer
In order to develop a strategic plan for undertaking Phase-II.

Any Questions? Thank You