Chief Executive’s Report on Draft Plan Consultation
Volume 2 – Summary of Submissions Received
Cork City Submission No.:
Person:
Organisation:
402
TMF
Summary of Submission and Observation:
• Submissions asserts that too much of proposed development is spread out over suburban locations, while there is insufficient ambition to intensify development in the city centre locations / docklands, this needs to be addressed in order to promote compact growth. • Notwithstanding our support above, we feel that the targets in density will fall short in achieving the desired outcomes of the plan as they will fall short of a tipping point required to achieve the viability of local service required for a 15 min city to become a reality. • Also contains comments on Transport and Mobility, Core strategy, Climate change • Green and Blue Infrastructure, Open Space and Biodiversity. The submission puts forward several concerns to several areas in the Plan, primarily in relation to Ch.4 Transport and Mobility. In relation to Ch.6 GBI, OS and B t he submission requests: • Strongly support ch. 5, ch.6 and associated objectives • We support the retention of any open space which has a social, amenity, nature, historic, or conservation value. However, a blanket protection of all green space may be interpreted to any grassy area including those of no social, amenity, nature, historic, or conservation value and hence prevent infill development, we have suggested that 6.20 includes a clarification to ensure this is not the case. • We Strongly support the following objectives unchanged as they are in the current draft
Objective 6.16 Objective 6.17 Objective 6.18 Objective 6.19 Objective 6.20 a. Objective 6.20 c. Objective 6.20 d. Objective 6.20 e. Objective 6.20 f.
• We believe that objective 6.20 b. needs modification to avoid conflict with the Strategic objectives laid out in chapter one and we cannot support without the following modifications. • We support the retention of and increase in open space which has a social, amenity, nature, historic, or conservation value. • Suggest the following alternative text for objective 6.20 b. There will be presumption against development on open space which has been habitually used as public open space, where these spaces have any significant social, amenity, nature or conservation value. Such lands shall be protected for recreation, open space and amenity purposes. This protection should not apply to narrow strips of grass along or between roads and paths or to overly large gassy areas which are perceived as desolate attracting anti-social behaviour which may be reduced to a more human scale to enhance its amenity value. • Economy and Employment, • Heritage Arts, • Env Infra, • KGA, • Placemaking Response and Recommendation to issues located in (Located under relevant chapter in the CE Report):
Volume 1 part 3 under Chapter 2,3,4,5,6,8,9,10 & 11
186
Powered by FlippingBook