Manila Bulletin
Philippines
National
PBBM urged to halt proposed Manila Bay reclamation projects over flooding, disaster risks
Philippines
National
PBBM urged to halt proposed Manila Bay reclamation projects over flooding, disaster risks
PBBM urged to halt proposed Manila Bay reclamation projects over flooding, disaster risks
By Jel Santos
Published Jan 14, 2026 01:07 pm
PRESIDENT MARCOS (MARK BALMORES/MB FILE PHOTO)
A broad coalition of church groups, environmental advocates, fisherfolk organizations, youth groups, and civil society organizations has formally petitioned President Marcos to stop proposed reclamation projects in Manila Bay, warning that the developments could worsen flooding, trigger environmental disasters, and endanger human lives.
The Manila Bulletin was furnished a copy of the petition to the President during the Manila Bay Reclamation Convergence Conversation forum held in Intramuros, Manila on Wednesday, Jan. 14.
In a petition received by the Office of the President on Dec. 23, 2025, and addressed to the President, the groups objected to 10 proposed reclamation projects planned between Rizal Park and the Cultural Center of the Philippines.
The petitioners said the projects would “irreversibly exacerbate flooding in the City of Manila and neighboring cities” and “inevitably destroy Manila Bay as the only marine biodiversity and a cultural gem in the country’s capital.”
They stressed that Manila is already highly vulnerable to flooding due to aging infrastructure and inadequate drainage systems, noting that reclamation areas approved by the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA) would be built several meters higher than existing city elevations.
According to the groups, such developments could block natural and built drainage pathways, worsening both coastal and inland flooding.
The petition also urged the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to disclose the findings of the Manila Bay Cumulative Impact Assessment conducted by the Marine Environment and Resources Foundation (MERF), which warned that reclamation would exacerbate flooding in low-lying Metro Manila areas.
“This bottleneck effect increases both coastal and inland flooding, posing heightened risks to lives and infrastructure, and undermining community resilience,” the petition stated.
Citing scientific studies, the petitioners further warned that the loss of wetlands and mudflats due to reclamation would weaken natural flood defenses.
Geological hazards
The petition highlighted geological risks identified by Filipino scientist Dr. Kelvin Rodolfo, including rapid land subsidence caused by excessive groundwater extraction.
It noted that coastal Metro Manila is subsiding “about 30 times faster” than natural rates, a problem that could worsen if reclamation projects increase groundwater demand and add the weight of high-rise buildings.
As such, the groups warned of heightened vulnerability to storm surges, citing the destructive impact of Super Typhoon Yolanda and the increasing intensity of typhoons linked to climate change.
They added that reclaimed areas are highly susceptible to earthquake-induced liquefaction, recalling the 1968 magnitude 7.3 Casiguran earthquake that caused the collapse of the Ruby Tower in Binondo, killing 260 people.
Impact on fisheries, marine life
The petition noted that marine scientists have warned that reclamation could disrupt Manila Bay’s natural water flow, trap pollutants, and worsen water quality, with potential public health consequences.
Likewise, the groups raised concerns over harmful algal blooms linked to increased sedimentation from dredging, which could threaten marine life and human health.
They stressed that Manila Bay remains biologically alive, citing a study that documented “51 coral genera and 167 fish species” in the bay, which continue to provide livelihoods to fisherfolk and support marine biodiversity.
Traffic, heritage, and public land
The petitioners questioned whether reclamation proponents had accounted for Manila’s already congested road network, including Roxas Boulevard, Kalaw Street, Burgos Street, and EDSA.
Also, they opposed plans requiring 1.2 hectares of Rizal Park public land to create access roads for a 318-hectare project dubbed “Waterfront City,” stressing that Rizal Park is a historic landmark belonging to the public.
“Every inch of the park belongs to the people, and any reduction of space diminishes its historical and cultural importance,” the petition stated.
Climate change, SC ruling
The petition underscored that climate change-driven sea level rise, compounded by land subsidence, is already affecting coastal areas and questioned whether these risks were reflected in reclamation plans.
The groups likewise cited the Supreme Court’s Manila Bay mandamus ruling (G.R. Nos. 171947-48, Dec. 18, 2008), which affirmed citizens’ constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology and ordered government agencies to clean up and rehabilitate Manila Bay.
They questioned whether approving reclamation projects would comply with the High Court’s directive to preserve the bay, citing reports that landfill materials may allow toxic substances to percolate into seawater.
Among their requests, the groups urged the Chief Executive to order the public release of cumulative impact assessments, review the authority and approval processes of the PRA, and halt reclamation projects they said serve private interests rather than the national good.
Moreover, the groups called for full public disclosure of reclamation contracts, payments, and inspection reports nationwide to prevent corruption.
“Manila Bay is a protected area and has been declared a national historical landmark,” the petition said, urging the President Marcos to heed public opposition and protect the bay for future generations.
The petition was signed by dozens of organizations, including church institutions, environmental groups, fisherfolk alliances, youth organizations, heritage advocates, and civil society coalitions.