Municipal Development Plan? It seems very controversial. below the letter sent by the WWF. The child is' opposed to the PSC of St. Augustine so 'and as' now. Why '? Why 'question. Against the refusal to the region, expressed as a city council unanimously bloom here a map of the PSC (Municipal Development Plan) with the Cispadana on display not just where you want. Legegrezza? Distraction instrument? Each review is made, but the hype and 'a lot. More 'Cispadana that you can' talk about Caospadana and once again it seems difficult
precede the environmental needs and other interests. Let's just hope there is a willingness to listen to the voices that are raising on a compound but authoritative. And the future, enno ', could be very dark. Listening and sharing are urgent and mandatory requirements.
Group Board "Open Project" considers it essential to the rapid deployment of the road axis which cispadano highway for people and businesses for a balanced development of transport in the area involved, the highway, shown in the maps, passes too close a distance from the towns of St. Charles and St. Augustine, public health must always be taken into due consideration in assessments of the establishment of this type of work, and even more so if they are possible alternative solutions, the path already suggested for future Highway Cispadana has been repeatedly considered by the Directors from both the previous inadequate and not acceptable just because of the extreme proximity to population centers (board resolutions, 29.11.2006 No 72, No 3 of 10.03. 2008 and No. 57 of 30.07.2010) , the solution to be adopted quickly must determine the expulsion from the towns, their mitigation / protection smog and noise over all'interramento in sections where it will be necessary and as requirements minimum necessary to accept and share infrastructure that will alter the final and fundamental quality of life citizens of the town of St. Augustine.
WWF High Ferrarese, opposes this letter to the Mayor of St. Augustine
"As is well known, this section is strongly opposed to the construction of the highway Cispadana . The main reasons have been widely discussed public meeting held June 15 from us us that she too has been reached between the speakers. For greater precision, we have summarized in an annex to the present observations
The Associated Municipal Structural Plan, so far developed, provides a step Cispadana highway that traces of all the current two-lane highway called Cispadana SP 70, extending it to a 4-lane (two sliding and two emergency). Moreover, such a route no longer requires the use of the SP 70 as a bypass of the villages of St. Augustine and St. Charles, with access from Via Torri 4, but provides the construction of a new highway which, from Orchard Street and the current cable on the bridge of St. Charles Napoleon, cut so devastating campaigns between that river and Via Martiri della Libertà to approach the highway near of 'Current Provincial Road 66. It follows that at that point we will have a flyover with a minimum of 6 lanes: two of the existing SP 70, plus 4 expansion to build the new highway which will add to the side of the freeway lanes 2 room (it is unclear whether also are expected to share or flush with the existing SP 66). This condition, if realized, being close devices to the homes of St. Charles and 450 meters from the center of the country, would quite clearly the formation of a demented monster urban source of intolerable noise and pollution and safe due to an increase in cancer, cardiovascular, etc. . in the population.
then add that you have read the documents that the regional Cispadana highway will be widened in the future until you have three lanes in each direction, with a further deterioration of the environmental impact.
There are also notes the position adopted in recent years St. Augustine's City Council unanimously expressed that to move the path "so equidistant from the villages of St. Charles and Mirabello" (Resolution No.3 of March 10, 2008). This position, reiterated in the meantime, no more firmly and is not followed by appropriate initiatives involving the public (debates, gathering signatures, etc..), Has gradually diminished to the point that the PSC has taken the whole track from the highway so far assumed institutions (Province and Region) totally repudiating the Board resolution referred to above.
It 's true that the current bureaucracy of the motorway is Cispadana still at the stage of "preliminary draft" but everything suggests, unfortunately, that the City Council of St. Augustine will accept the current path for the usual fear of losing or hinder one occasion called "development", but at the expense of health of citizens and of an acceptable urban structure of the territory. Despite the pledges made by her during the public meeting of June 15 last, the city council of St. Augustine with the current PSC is unfortunately proving to adapt to the absurd current route of the motorway and the devastating changes the bypass.
For all the reasons above, this Section WWF calls for the removal from the PSC of the route of Highway Cispadana and reported to it, including new bypass. "
0 comments:
Post a Comment