More details on flood scheme revealed
The controversial Cork city flood relief scheme which state agencies published further details about this week has come under renewed fire from a well-known opposition group.
The Office of Public Works (OPW) and Cork City Council have published further details and images of the Lower Lee Flood Relief Scheme (LLFRS) which they say will protect more than 900 homes and 1,200 businesses.
The scheme is the result of over thirteen years of consideration and study of the Lee catchment area and the nature of flooding impacting Cork. As a whole, it extends over approximately 15km from west of Ballincollig to the eastern edge of Cork city centre island.
It is hoped that the publication of further detail and images will, a statement from the two agencies said, assuage genuine misunderstanding about the scheme and also challenge significant misrepresentation of it as well.
The scheme will facilitate public realm improvements on a scale not previously seen in Cork city centre, making it more attractive to live in and visit, it is claimed. These improvements, which include walkways and cycleways, will encourage a switch from cars to other more environmentally friendly transport modalities. As a result, the River Lee will be more open for usage through additional access points, pontoons and moorings.
About two thirds of public river frontage will have open railings after the scheme is completed and it will create approximately 8km of new or improved riverside walk and cycleways from the Lee Fields to the city centre.
There are almost 400 ‘protected structures’ in the city centre’s flood risk area, all of which will be protected by the scheme.
However, a group who have lobbied against what they have dubbed a “walls scheme” has responded by saying that this scheme won’t work.
A spokesperson for Save Cork City told the Cork Independent: “Experts have studied the OPW proposal and have concluded that it won't work due to issues of rising groundwater in the city which is almost impossible to control. The scheme has been called dangerous because it is fundamentally susceptible to failure by human error and over-topping of the 15km of defences that are proposed and thus it increases the risk of a large scale flood event that could lead to significant loss of life. This is an uncomfortable reality for the OPW.”
He added: “Experts have concluded that a tidal barrier is an economical approach to protecting Cork and provides great advantages for the city in terms of safety of the population and protection of the vulnerable city centre and docklands.
“The tidal barrier offers safer more widespread flood defence for less investment and is the only scheme that provides a certainty of outcome to protect the city.”
He continued: “The protection of Cork should follow a solution that is climate change considerate not one that provides almost no opportunity to react to climate change than adding more height to the walls.
“The OPW would damage so many aspects of our potential as a city with a scheme that is so deeply flawed that we cannot understand why it is still being pursued. In desperation, OPW are now suggesting that walls should be built and a tidal barrier later. OPW are continuing to spend on a propaganda (campaign) designed to highlight apparent advantages of their scheme while hiding the serious flaws.”