Chief Executive’s Report on Draft Plan Consultation
Volume 2 – Summary of Submissions Received
• Within the context of the Plan, a watercourse could be assessed in relation to its existing aesthetic, amenity and recreational value, its potential for improvement and protection and the requirements to achieve this potential i.e. control of further physical interference, water quality deterioration, access, community participation etc. • The 1997 Habitats Regulations and Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) Directive does not extend to the inclusion of all aquatic habitats of fish bearing importance or of amenity value. Therefore the reliance of the Development Plan on these area designations solely will exclude significant numbers of waterways which are in need of protection. • IFI requests that the Development Plan provide for the maintenance and preservation of all watercourses and associated riparian habitats.
A Sustainable Development Plan and the Environment:
• Consideration should be given to potential significant impacts on:
Water quality
• • • • • • •
Aquatic and associated riparian habitats
Biological Diversity
Ecosystem structure and functioning Fish spawning and nursery areas
Surface water hydrology Passage of migratory fish
• Areas of natural heritage importance including geological heritage sites • Sport and commercial fishing and angling • Amenity and recreational areas
The Development Plan should:
•
• Be consistent with River Basin Management Plans and comply with the requirements of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) (2000/60/EC). • Include policies which preclude developments in areas where the sewage infrastructure facilities necessary for development do not exist. • Advocate a change from an acceptance of river corridor interference to an assumption against it. • Promote the integration and improvement of natural watercourses in urban renewal and development proposals. • Encourage Local participation in urban and rural renewal. • Include provision for consultation with IFI on developments which may impact on the aquatic environment.
Response and Recommendation to issues located in:
Volume 1, part 3 under Chapter 5 & 9.
Cork City Submission No.:
Person:
Organisation:
10
William Loftus
Summary of Submission and Observation:
• This submission proposes a relief road for Douglas, to provide a bypass route away from the town centre which is subject to traffic issues. • Proposed bypass south of the town centre • Traffic relief for Douglas
Response and Recommendation to issues located in:
Volume 1, part 3 under Chapter 4
14
Powered by FlippingBook