The Planning System and Flood Risk Management - Offaly County ...
The Planning System and Flood Risk Management - Offaly County ...
The Planning System and Flood Risk Management - Offaly County ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
• Change in number of properties at risk in 1% <strong>and</strong> 0.1% event before <strong>and</strong>after. Assumes mitigation measures put in place – From an economicviewpoint development can replace existing property with lowervulnerability l<strong>and</strong> uses <strong>and</strong> also development that is designed to beflood-resistant or resilient. A reduction in economic risk can be achieved;69• Scale <strong>and</strong> nature of flood risks – <strong>The</strong> residual risk maps should indicatelikely depths <strong>and</strong> flow routes. From running the surface water screeningassessment the scale <strong>and</strong> extent of the surface water flood risks can alsobe considered;• Impact of mitigation measure on other areas downstream <strong>and</strong> adjacent– How wide-ranging does the impact assessment need to be to takeaccount of the effects of significant l<strong>and</strong> raising or alteration or blockageof flow routes.<strong>Planning</strong> authorities should use these indicators to qualitatively assess eachkey type of vulnerable l<strong>and</strong> use proposed in each of the policy areas beingconsidered by the SFRA. Each of the indicators should be scored accordingto the system outlined in the table below to produce a <strong>Flood</strong> <strong>Risk</strong> BalanceSheet. <strong>The</strong> results should be assessed to produce one of five possible outcomeson the acceptability of a particular type of development within a policy area.<strong>The</strong> five potential outcomes are:• Counter to strategic approach, flood risk unacceptable. It would bedifficult to meet the criteria of the Justification Test. Not recommended;• Sequentially not preferred but a limited range of l<strong>and</strong> uses might bepossible;• Sequentially not preferred but a wider range of l<strong>and</strong> uses could bebrought forward after careful consideration <strong>and</strong> subject to an appropriatesite-specific FRA;• Acceptable with some detailed consideration of flood-risk issues to beresolved by an appropriate site-specific FRA; <strong>and</strong>• Acceptable subject to a satisfactory appropriate site-specific FRA.<strong>Planning</strong> Guidelines