International Journal

on Marine Navigation

and Safety of Sea Transportation

Volume 3

Number 3

September 2009

261

1 INTRODUCTION

Marine navigation has been practised by man for ag-

es. In particular phases of civilisation’s development

more and more new forms of human activity at sea

have appeared. Fishery, the conduct of submarine

cables and pipelines, excavation of natural resources

from under the sea bottom, last but not least the con-

struction of artificial islands and wind farms are only

the chief activities conducted currently by man at

sea.

The undertaking of new initiatives at sea by man

and increasing their scope makes it necessary to or-

der them in long-term perspective lest their mutual

interaction should cause conflicts. This pertains both

to marine shipping and to other forms of man’s eco-

nomic activity on a micro-scale understood as a

coastal state and on a macro scale understood as in-

fluence on neighbouring states and transit shipping.

The priority is safety and marine environment pro-

tection.

Recently, as part of working out a marine policy,

the European Union has, among other things, laid

stress on spatial planning at sea. According to Blue

Book (EU 2007) „increasing competition for marine

space and the cumulative impact of human activities

on marine ecosystems render the current fragmented

decision-making in maritime affairs inadequate, and

demand a more collaborative and integrated ap-

proach. For too long policies on, for instance, mari-

time transport, fisheries, energy, surveillance and

policing of the seas, tourism, the marine environ-

ment, and marine research have developed on sepa-

rate tracks, at times leading to inefficiencies, inco-

herencies and conflicts of use.

Based on this recognition, the Commission's vi-

sion is for an integrated maritime policy that covers

all aspects of our relationship with the oceans and

seas. This innovative and holistic approach will pro-

vide a coherent policy framework that will allow for

the optimal development of all sea-related activities

in a sustainable manner”.

An integrated governance framework for mari-

time affairs requires horizontal planning tools that

cut across sea-related sectoral policies and support

joined up policy making. The following three are of

major importance: maritime surveillance which is

critical for the safe and secure use of marine space;

maritime spatial planning which is a key planning

tool for sustainable decision-making; and a compre-

hensive and accessible source of data and infor-

mation.

According to the Blue Book (EU 2007) a

Roadmap for Maritime Spatial Planning: Achieving

Common Principles in the EU has recently been ac-

cepted (EU 2008). According to the records of this

plan: Maritime Spatial Planning is a key instrument

for the Integrated Maritime Policy for the EU. It

helps public authorities and stakeholders to coordi-

nate their action and optimises the use of marine

space to benefit economic development and the ma-

rine environment. This Communication aims to fa-

cilitate the development of Maritime Spatial Plan-

ning by Member States and encourage its

implementation at national and EU level. It sets out

key principles for Maritime Spatial Planning and

Safety of Navigation and Spatial Planning at

Sea

J. Hajduk

Maritime University of Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland

ABSTRACT: Until recently the concept of spatial planning concerned only land areas, chaos prevailing at sea

in this scope. Vessel routes were selected by the Master on the principle of “freedom of navigation”. It was

similar with the submarine routes of pipelines and cables, wind farm construction zones, excavation of aggre-

gates, or the conduct of any human activity at sea.

A systemic approach is introduced and preferred currently, which is to take into consideration the natural

conditions and human achievements on one hand, and look ahead on the other, systematising procedural ac-

tivities and minimising possible conflicts of interests among potential users of the sea.

262

seeks, by way of debate, to encourage the develop-

ment of a common approach among Member States.

Particular European countries have so far reached

different degrees of progress in the scope of spatial

planning at sea. New organisational solutions are

implemented and the related documents are tempo-

rarily of “proposition” status and are passing through

the stage of domestic and international agreements

(EU 2008).

2 DRAFT SPATIAL PLANNING IN THE

GERMAN EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE

(EEZ)

The proposal put forward by Germany in June 2008

(BSH 2008) takes account of the following forms of

human activity at sea:

− shipping,

− exploitation of non-living resources,

− pipelines and submarine cables,

− marine scientific research,

− energy production, wind energy in particular,

− fisheries and mariculture,

− protection of the marine environment

For shipping, on the other hand, the following

chief objectives and principles have been set down

(BSH 2008):

1 Shipping is granted priority over the other spatial-

ly significant uses in the priority areas for ship-

ping as indicated in the map (Figures 1&2). To

the extent spatially significant planning, measures

and projects are not compatible with the function

of the shipping priority area in these areas they

are not permitted.

2 Special consideration is given to shipping in the

reservation areas for shipping as indicated in the

map. This needs to be taken into account in a

comparative evaluation with other spatially sig-

nificant planning tasks, measures and projects.

3 Pollution of the marine environment by shipping

shall be reduced.

Besides applicable regulations of IMO, the "best

environmental practice" according to the OSPAR

(The Convention for the Protection of the Marine

Environment of the North-East Atlantic) and HEL-

COM (The Convention on the Protection of the Ma-

rine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area) Conven-

tions and the respective state-of-the-art technology

shall be taken into account.

Generally, the objectives pertaining to shipping

have been set down correctly in the proposal. In

Figure 1 the presented main and reserve shipping

routes in the North Sea do not arouse controversies.

The planned main shipping routes and reserve ship-

ping areas overlap with the main routes of vessel

traffic flow and take account of the increased num-

ber and size of ships, including difficult hydromete-

orologic conditions and emergency situations.

The problem of EEZ zone in the Baltic Sea has

been tackled in a completely different way, on the

other hand (Fig. 2). Only the vessel traffic from the

Kiel Canal and the Great Belt to the north-east in the

direction of the Bornholmsgat has been considered.

No vessel traffic to and from the ports of

Swinoujscie and Szczecin has been taken account of,

which may pose a threat to navigational safety in fu-

ture and cause sea accidents. At present there are

two shipping routes leading up to the ports of

Swinouj- scie/Szczecin. The first and basic one is

located eastward off the coasts of Rügen on Germa-

ny’s territorial waters.

Figure 1. Spatial Plan for the German Exclusive Economic

Zone (Draft) - Regulations- North Sea

(http://www.bsh.de/en/The_BSH/Notifications/Draft_map_Nor

th_Sea.pdf)

The other, an alternative one, runs outside of

Germany’s territorial waters. There is also a ship-

ping route linking by the shortest distance the ports

of Swinoujscie and Ystad in Sweden.

Figure 2. Spatial Plan for the German Exclusive Economic

Zone (Draft) - Regulations- Baltic Sea.

(http://www.bsh.de/en/The_BSH/Notifications/Draft_map_balt

ic_sea.pdf)

263

What is more, when planning the future no ac-

count has been taken of the shipping route south-

wards of Bornholm Island, an outline of which was

presented in the form of a traffic separation schemas

(TSS) in a common Polish-German document at a

meeting of IMO NAV Subcommittee (Fig. 3.)

The shipping route planned is of high importance

for vessels in transit towards the ports of the Gulf of

Gdansk and ports in the Kaliningrad District, in

Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. The key location lim-

iting the vessel traffic to the south of Bornholm Is-

land is designation of the vessel traffic separation

zone between the Adlergrund and Odrzana Bank.

The wreck of Jan Heweliusz ferry is an additional

obstacle to navigation in the rather narrow deep-

water strip.

Figure 3. Planned Routeing Measures for the Southern Baltic.

(IMO 2008)

Another problem in the proposed plan of spatial

development is the marking of the northern approach

fairway and anchorages of Swinoujscie port as polit-

ically disputable area. According to the Polish par-

ty’s knowledge the problem was solved by a bilat-

eral agreement with the German Democratic

Republic in 1989 and confirmed by the Federal Re-

public of Germany (Dz.U. 1989).

3 VESSEL TRAFFIC IN THE GERMAN EEZ IN

THE BALTIC

As presented in Figure 4, vessel traffic in the west-

ern part of the Baltic runs in many directions. The

basic flow of vessel traffic falls into line NE-SW on

the route from Gedser towards Bornholmgast. Addi-

tional routes run to/from the port of Swinoujscie by

two ways, one along the island of Rügen and another

by vessels plying to Ystad. Vessel traffic can also be

observed below the island of Bornholm on an inter-

shoal inlet, where a vessels TSS is planned (Fig. 3).

Traffic of vessels with smaller draft also runs to the

north of the planned TSS.

When planning vessel traffic the prevailing trends

and planned investments should be taken into ac-

count. Among the latter in the region there is the

LNG terminal, to be started about 2012 in the exter-

nal port of Swinoujscie.

Figure 4. Traffic on the west part of the Baltic Sea (example)

The traffic of gas carriers with draft of the order

of 12.5 m and about 300 m length is planned alterna-

tively on two basic routes (Fig. 5):

− basic route C skirting the coast of Rügen Island,

− alternative route running along the northern ap-

proach fairway outside of Germany’s territorial

sea waters, indicated in the north as alternative,

with inclusion in the traffic of North Rügen sepa-

ration zone or at Arkona buoy.

Figure 5. Routes to Swinoujscie from/to West. (Hajduk J. &

Montewka J. 2007)

264

The existing vessel traffic and traffic generated

by the planned investment in the form of LNG ter-

minal should be taken into account in the spatial

planning of this water area; otherwise, a menacing

situation may needlessly be created in future caused

by using traditional and basic shipping routes for

other forms of human activity at sea.

4 REMARKS FOR THE PRESENTED

PROPOSAL OF SPATIAL PLANNING OF

THE GERMAN EEZ

Figure 6 presents a suggestion for correcting the spa-

tial planning of the German EEZ, out of concern for

navigational safety in future. The remarks amount to

the following (Fig. 6):

− taking account of and plotting of shipping routes

planned as alternative for LNG gas carriers call-

ing in future at the Swinoujscie terminal,

− plotting shipping routes traditionally used by sea

ferries plying between Swinoujscie - Ystad,

− taking account of the shipping route southwards

of Bornholm Island with consideration to the

planned vessels TSS,

− independently of the political status, which

should be solved on another plane, the approach

fairways and anchorages of Swinoujscie port

must be marked as areas reserved for shipping.

Figure 6. Proposal for correction of the Spatial Plan for the

German Exclusive Economic Zone (Draft) - Regulations- Bal-

tic Sea

5 SPATIAL PLANNING IN POLISH SEA

AREAS

At present, spatial planning of sea areas is provided

for in Polish legislature (Dz. U. 2003 a, b).

Currently, in accordance with delegation of art.

37b par. 4 of Act of 21st March 1991 r. on sea areas

of the Polish Republic and maritime administration,

quote “the minister proper for construction, spatial

and housing economy shall determine by way of or-

dinance the required planning scope of spatial de-

velopment of interior sea waters, territorial sea and

exclusive economic zone in the textual and graphic

parts, taking particular consideration of requirements

pertaining to planning materials, kind of cartograph-

ic studies, applied markings, terminology, standards

and way of documenting planning work”.

The above-mentioned authorisation was put into

effect on 11

July 2003 in connection with the Act

of 27

March 2003 on spatial planning and devel-

opment (Dz. U. 2003 a), which was introduced into

the Act on sea areas of the Polish Republic and

maritime administration in part II, chapter 9, grant-

ing the minister proper for construction, spatial and

housing economy competences to accept plans of

spatial development of interior sea waters, territorial

sea and exclusive economic zone. (According to art.

37a par. 1 and art. 37b par. 1 of Act of 21st March

1991 r. on sea areas of the Polish Republic and mari-

time administration, quote ˝Art.37a par.1.-The min-

ister proper for matters of construction, spatial and

housing economy in cooperation with the ministers

proper for matters of sea economy, agriculture, the

environment, internal affairs and national defence

may accept and order a plan of spatial development

of sea internal waters, territorial sea and exclusive

economic zone, taking consideration of establish-

ments determined in Pass. 2 and issued valid permis-

sions mentioned in Art. 23 and Art. 23a. – Art. 37b.

par.1. - The draft of a plan for spatial development

of sea internal waters, territorial sea and exclusive

economic zone is prepared by the director of the

maritime board proper for the area covered by the

plan˝).

Due to lack of practice in the scope of making

similar plans in sea areas, it was necessary to solve a

number of problems pertaining to planning materi-

als, graphic and letter markings concerning the in-

tended use of the areas (in particular the economic

zone constituting a part of international waters), re-

quirements related to the content records of plans

and many others.

Work undertaken for solving those problems con-

tinued until September 2005. In October 2005 the

order draft was submitted for social and interde-

partmental coordination. In November 2005 the de-

partment had remarks reported by the Society of

Polish Town-Planners, the National Town-Planners’

Chamber and the Architects’ Chamber of the Polish

Republic, remarks reported by the departments, and

also the opinion of the Governmental Legislature

Centre. In conclusion of the GLC’s opinion, part of

the records related to procedures of preparation,

passing and accepting plans of sea areas’ spatial de-

265

velopment should have been legally regulated

(Grabarczyk C. 2008).

After change of government and calling of inde-

pendent Ministries, of Construction and of Sea

Economy, work was suspended for two years. Legis-

lative work was resumed late in 2007. In June 2008

an act draft was submitted for public agreement, re-

lated to amending building regulations, act on plan-

ning and spatial development and some other acts,

where in Chapter 4a “Spatial Planning in Sea Areas”

the requirement was fulfilled pertaining to the regu-

lation of procedures of accepting sea areas’ spatial

development plans (Grabarczyk C. 2008).

In article 49g of the above-mentioned act draft an

amended authorisation was included concerning the

scope of subject plans: ˝The minister proper for mat-

ters of sea economy, in cooperation with the minister

proper for matters of construction, spatial and hous-

ing economy, shall determine by way of order the

required planning scope for spatial development of

sea areas in the textual and graphic parts, with par-

ticular consideration of planning materials, source

data and other applied data created in the process of

planning, the standard of metadata for spatial data,

used and created in the process of planning patterns,

applied markings, symbols and terminology and the

way of documenting planning work˝.

Figure 7. Instance of spatial planning in Polish sea areas

(Cieślak A. 2008).

In connection with the above, after the parliament

passes the above-mentioned act draft, the order draft

determining the planning scope of sea areas’ spatial

development, in accordance with delegation of arti-

cle 49g, after conducting the legislative process will

be submitted for signing by respective ministers

(Grabarczyk C. 2008).

6 CONCLUSIONS

The experience so far in the scope of spatial plan-

ning indicates a general need for preparing such

plans on sea areas in an identical way as for land ar-

eas. Priorities should be established and planning

scope determined. Considering the state of marine

shipping and its development trends towards in-

creasing the size of vessels and the frequency of

their callings, it is a priority in the range of safety to

ensure a transparent system of basic shipping routes.

The securing of water areas with shipping routes

should be based on an analysis of vessel traffic so

far, the planned development of ports and assump-

tions concerning the size of ships handled. The ef-

fect of hydrometeorologic conditions and emergency

situations should also be taken into consideration.

Insufficient planning of shipping routes now may

cause potentially dangerous situations in future or

simply increase the accident rate.

The process of agreeing and consulting initial

proposals of spatial development planning should

take its course inside the structures of the coastal

state and with neighbouring states. An example of

negotiating such a plan between Germany and Po-

land does not make one optimistic. Purely political

reasons not related to the subject matter are stressed

and the interests of the neighbouring country are not

taken into consideration.

In accordance with the trend prevalent in EU

countries, serious thought should be given in Poland

concerning structural changes in maritime admin-

istration, aiming at separation of public and legal

functions from economic activity, which might bring

out and clear the matters connected with the spatial

management of sea areas. An example of maritime

administration structure has been presented in study

(Hajduk J. & Rajewski P. 2004).

REFERENCES

BSH. 2008. Plan for the German Exclusive Economic Zone

(Draft). Bundesamt für Seeschifffahrt und Hydrographie.

June, 2008.

Cieślak A. 2008. Strategia zagospodarowania obszarów mor-

skich. Ministerstwo Rozwoju Regionalnego. Seminarium

„Zagospodarowanie obszarów morskich Polski” . Warsza-

wa, kwiecień 2008. (Development Strategy for Sea Areas.

Seminar “Development of Poland’s Sea Areas”. Warsaw,

April, 2008).

Dz. U. 2003 a. Ustawa z dnia 27 marca 2003 r. o planowaniu i

zagospodarowaniu przestrzennym (Dz. U. z 2003 r. Nr 80,

poz. 717, z późn. zm.). (Act of 27

March 2003 on Spatial

Planning and Development. Law Gazette of 2003 No. 80

Pos. 717 with later amendments).

Dz. U. 2003 b. . Ustawa z dnia 21 marca 1991 r. o obszarach

morskich Rzeczpospolitej Polskiej i administracji mor-

skiej,(Dz.U. z 2003 r. Nr 153 poz.1502 z późn. zm.). (Act

of 21

March 1991 on the Polish Republic’s Sea Areas and

266

Maritime Administration. Law Gazette of 2003 No. 153

Pos. 1502 with later amendments).

Dz. U. 1989. UMOWA między Polską Rzecząpospolitą Lu-

dową a Niemiecką Republiką Demokratyczną w sprawie

rozgraniczenia obszarów morskich w Zatoce Pomorskiej,

podpisana w Berlinie dnia 22 maja 1989 r. (Dz. U. z dnia

20 lipca 1989 r.). (Law Gazette 1989. AGREEMENT be-

tween the Polish Peoples’ Republic and the German Demo-

cratic Republic Concerning the Separation of Sea Areas in

the Pomeranian Bay, signed in Berlin on 22

May 1989.

Law Gazette of 20

July 1989).

EU. 2008. Roadmap for Maritime Spatial Planning: Achieving

Common Principles in the EU. Communication from the

Commission. Brussels, 25.11.2008. COM(2008) 791 final.

EU. 2007. An Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Un-

ion. Communication from the Commission to the European

Parliament, The Council, The European Economic and So-

cial Committee and The Committee of the Regions. Brus-

sels, 10.10.2007 COM(2007) 575 final

Furmańczyk K. & Szefler K. 2007. Zagospodarowanie i prze-

strzenne aspekty rozwoju strefy przybrzeżnej Bałtyku, za-

równo strefy wód terytorialnych (12 milowej) jak i wyłącz-

nej strefy ekonomicznej (EEZ). Ekspertyza. (Spatial

Development Aspects of the Baltic’s Coastal Area, both the

Territorial Waters (12-mile) Zone and the Exclusive Eco-

nomic Zone (EEZ). An Expert Evaluation).

Grabarczyk C. 2008. Pismo GB2b-0701/3/08/839746. Od-

powiedź na interpelację poselską nr SPS-023-3860/08.

14.07.2008. (Letter GB2b-0701/3/08/839746. A Reply to

Parliamentary Question No. SPS-023-3860/08 of 14

July

2008.Pismo GB2b-0701/3/08/839746).

Hajduk J. & Rajewski P. 2004. Model strukturalny administra-

cji morskiej Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej z uwzględnieniem

uwarunkowań i aspektów ekonomicznych, merytorycznych,

społecznych i politycznych. Praca naukowo-badawcza na

zlecenie Ministerstwa Infrastruktury. AM Szczecin 2004.

(A Structural Model of the Polish Republic’s Maritime

Administration with Consideration to Economic, Factual,

Social and Political Conditions and Aspects. Scientific Re-

search Work ordered by the Ministry of Infrastructure. Mar-

itime University of Szczecin 2004).

Hajduk J. & Montewka J. 2007. Safety of vessels’ traffic,

bound for Polish ports. 7th International Symposium on

Navigation, June 20-22, 2007 MU, Gdynia, PL

IMO. 2005. Assessment of the traffic in the Baltic Sea West.

Submitted by Denmark and Sweden. NAV 51/INF.3.

IMO. 2008.Information about planned new routeing measures

in the southern part of the Baltic Sea. Submitted by Germa-

ny and Poland. NAV 54/INF.5.